NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp stated:
rwp@
1Corinthians:1:23 @{But we preach Christ crucified} (\hmeis de krussomen Christon estaurmenon\). Grammatically stated as a partial result (\de\) of the folly of both Jews and Greeks, actually in sharp contrast. We proclaim, "we do not discuss or dispute" (Lightfoot). Christ (Messiah) as crucified, as in strkjv@2:2; strkjv@Galatians:3:1|, "not a sign-shower nor a philosopher" (Vincent). Perfect passive participle of \stauro\. {Stumbling-block} (\skandalon\). Papyri examples mean trap or snare which here tripped the Jews who wanted a conquering Messiah with a world empire, not a condemned and crucified one (Matthew:27:42; strkjv@Luke:24:21|). {Foolishness} (\mrian\). Folly as shown by their conduct in Athens (Acts:17:32|).
rwp@1Corinthians:1:27 @{God chose} (\exelexato ho theos\). First aorist middle of \ekleg\, old verb to pick out, to choose, the middle for oneself. It expands the idea in \klsin\ (verse 26|). Three times this solemn verb occurs here with the purpose stated each time. Twice the same purpose is expressed, {that he might put to shame} (\hina kataischuni\, first aorist active subjunctive with \hina\ of old verb \kataischun\, perfective use of \kata\). The purpose in the third example is {that he might bring to naught} (\hina katargsi\, make idle, \argos\, rare in old Greek, but frequent in Paul). The contrast is complete in each paradox: {the foolish things} (\ta mra\), {the wild men} (\tous sophous\); {the weak things} (\ta asthen\), {the strong things} (\ta ischura\); {the things that are not} (\ta m onta\), {and that are despised} (\ta exouthenmena\, considered nothing, perfect passive participle of \exouthene\), {the things that are} (\ta onta\). It is a studied piece of rhetoric and powerfully put.
rwp@1Corinthians:2:13 @{Which things also we speak} (\ha kai laloumen\). This onomatopoetic verb \lale\ (from \la-la\), to utter sounds. In the papyri the word calls more attention to the form of utterance while \leg\ refers more to the substance. But \lale\ in the N.T. as here is used of the highest and holiest speech. Undoubtedly Paul employs the word purposely for the utterance of the revelation which he has understood. That is to say, there is revelation (verse 10|), illumination (verse 12|), and inspiration (verse 13|). Paul claims therefore the help of the Holy Spirit for the reception of the revelation, for the understanding of it, for the expression of it. Paul claimed this authority for his preaching (1Thessalonians:4:2|) and for his epistles (2Thessalonians:3:14|). {Not in words which man's wisdom teacheth} (\ouk en didaktois anthrpins sophias logois\). Literally, "not in words taught by human wisdom." The verbal adjective \didaktois\ (from \didask\, to teach) is here passive in idea and is followed by the ablative case of origin or source as in strkjv@John:6:45|, \esontai pantes didaktoi theou\ (from strkjv@Isaiah:54:13|), "They shall all be taught by God." The ablative in Greek, as is well known, has the same form as the genitive, though quite different in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516). Songs:then Paul claims the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance (\laloumen\) of the words, "which the Spirit teacheth (\en didaktois pneumatos\), "in words taught by the Spirit" (ablative \pneumatos\ as above). Clearly Paul means that the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance of the revelation extends to the words. No theory of inspiration is here stated, but it is not _mere_ human wisdom. Paul's own Epistles bear eloquent witness to the lofty claim here made. They remain today after nearly nineteen centuries throbbing with the power of the Spirit of God, dynamic with life for the problems of today as when Paul wrote them for the needs of the believers in his time, the greatest epistles of all time, surcharged with the energy of God. {Comparing spiritual things with spiritual} (\pneumatikois pneumatika sunkrinontes\). Each of these words is in dispute. The verb \sunkrin\, originally meant to combine, to join together fitly. In the LXX it means to interpret dreams (Genesis:40:8,22; strkjv@41:12|) possibly by comparison. In the later Greek it may mean to compare as in strkjv@2Corinthians:10:12|. In the papyri Moulton and Milligan (_Vocabulary_) give it only for "decide," probably after comparing. But "comparing," in spite of the translations, does not suit well here. Songs:it is best to follow the original meaning to combine as do Lightfoot and Ellicott. But what gender is \pneumatikois\? Is it masculine or neuter like \pneumatika\? If masculine, the idea would be "interpreting (like LXX) spiritual truths to spiritual persons" or "matching spiritual truths with spiritual persons." This is a possible rendering and makes good sense in harmony with verse 14|. If \pneumatikois\ be taken as neuter plural (associative instrumental case after \sun\ in \sunkrinontes\), the idea most naturally would be, "combining spiritual ideas (\pneumatika\) with spiritual words" (\pneumatikois\). This again makes good sense in harmony with the first part of verse 13|. On the whole this is the most natural way to take it, though various other possibilities exist.
rwp@1Corinthians:3:15 @{Shall be burned} (\katakasetai\). First-class condition again, assumed as true. Second future (late form) passive indicative of \katakai\, to burn down, old verb. Note perfective use of preposition \kata\, shall be burned down. We usually say "burned up," and that is true also, burned up in smoke. {He shall suffer loss} (\zmithsetai\). First future passive indicative of \zmi\, old verb from \zmia\ (damage, loss), to suffer loss. In strkjv@Matthew:16:26; strkjv@Mark:8:36; strkjv@Luke:9:25| the loss is stated to be the man's soul (\psuchn\) or eternal life. But here there is no such total loss as that. The man's work (\ergon\) is burned up (sermons, lectures, books, teaching, all dry as dust). {But he himself shall be saved} (\autos de sthsetai\). Eternal salvation, but not by purgatory. His work is burned up completely and hopelessly, but he himself escapes destruction because he is really a saved man a real believer in Christ. {Yet so as through fire} (\houts de hs dia puros\). Clearly Paul means with his work burned down (verse 15|). It is the tragedy of a fruitless life, of a minister who built so poorly on the true foundation that his work went up in smoke. His sermons were empty froth or windy words without edifying or building power. They left no mark in the lives of the hearers. It is the picture of a wasted life. The one who enters heaven by grace, as we all do who are saved, yet who brings no sheaves with him. There is no garnered grain the result of his labours in the harvest field. There are no souls in heaven as the result of his toil for Christ, no enrichment of character, no growth in grace.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:13 @{But God shall bring to nought both it and them} (\ho de theos kai tautn kai tauta katargsei\). Another proverb about the adaptation of the belly (\koilia\) and food (\brmata\, not just flesh), which had apparently been used by some in Corinth to justify sexual license (fornication and adultery). These Gentiles mixed up matters not alike at all (questions of food and sensuality). " We have traces of this gross moral confusion in the circumstances which dictated the Apostolic Letter (Acts:15:23-29|), where things wholly diverse are combined, as directions about meats to be avoided and a prohibition of fornication" (Lightfoot). Both the belly (\tautn\) and the foods (\tauta\) God will bring to an end by death and change. {But the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body} (\to de sma ou ti porneii alla ti kurii, kai ho kurios ti smati\). Paul here boldly shows the fallacy in the parallel about appetite of the belly for food. The human body has a higher mission than the mere gratification of sensual appetite. Sex is of God for the propagation of the race, not for prostitution. Paul had already stated that God dwells in us as the sanctuary of the Holy Spirit (3:16f.|). This higher function of the body he here puts forward against the debased Greek philosophy of the time which ignored completely Paul's idea, "the body for the Lord and the Lord for the body" (dative of personal interest in both cases). "The Lord Jesus and \porneia\ contested for the bodies of Christian men; loyal to him they must renounce _that_, yielding to _that_ they renounce him" (Findlay).
rwp@1Corinthians:7:19 @{But the keeping of the commandments of God} (\alla trsis entoln theou\). Old word in sense of watching (Acts:4:3|). Paul's view of the worthlessness of circumcision or of uncircumcision is stated again in strkjv@Galatians:5:6; strkjv@6:15; strkjv@Romans:2:25-29| (only the inward or spiritual Jew counts).
rwp@1Corinthians:9:24 @{In a race} (\en stadii\). Old word from \histmi\, to place. A stated or fixed distance, 606 3/4 feet, both masculine \stadioi\ (Matthew:14:24; strkjv@Luke:24:13|) and neuter as here. Most of the Greek cities had race-courses for runners like that at Olympia. {The prize} (\to brabeion\). Late word, in inscriptions and papyri. Latin _brabeum_. In N. T. only here and strkjv@Phillipians:3:14|. The victor's prize which only one could receive. {That ye may attain} (\hina katalabte\). Final use of \hina\ and perfective use of \kata-\ with \labte\ (effective aorist active subjunctive, grasp and hold). Old verb \katalamban\ and used in strkjv@Phillipians:3:12ff|.
rwp@1Corinthians:9:25 @{That striveth in the games} (\ho agnizomenos\). Common verb for contest in the athletic games (\agn\), sometimes with the cognate accusative, \agna agnizomai\ as in strkjv@1Timothy:6:12; strkjv@2Timothy:4:7|. Probably Paul often saw these athletic games. {Is temperate in all things} (\panta egkrateuetai\). Rare verb, once in Aristotle and in a late Christian inscription, and strkjv@1Corinthians:7:9| and here, from \egkrats\, common adjective for one who controls himself. The athlete then and now has to control himself (direct middle) in all things (accusative of general reference). This is stated by Paul as an athletic axiom. Training for ten months was required under the direction of trained judges. Abstinence from wine was required and a rigid diet and regimen of habits.
rwp@1Timothy:4:4 @{Creature} (\ktisma\). Late word from \ktiz\, result of creating. See strkjv@Genesis:1:31; strkjv@Mark:7:15; strkjv@Romans:14:14| for the idea stated. {To be rejected} (\apoblton\). Old verbal adjective in passive sense from \apoball\, to throw away, here only in N.T. {If it be received} (\lambanomenon\). "Being received." Present passive participle of \lamban\, in conditional sense, "with thanksgiving."
rwp@2Corinthians:4:8 @{Pressed} (\thlibomenoi\). From \thlib\, to press as grapes, to contract, to squeeze. Series of present passive participles here through verse 9| that vividly picture Paul's ministerial career. {Yet not straitened} (\all' ou stenochroumenoi\). Each time the exception is stated by \all' ou\. From \stenochre\ (\stenochros\, from \stenos\, narrow, \chros\, space), to be in a narrow place, to keep in a tight place. Late verb, in LXX and papyri. In N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:6:12|. {Yet not unto despair} (\all' ouk exaporoumenoi\). Late perfective compound with \ex-\ of \exapore\. A very effective play on words here, lost, but not lost out.
rwp@2Thessalonians:1:3 @{We are bound} (\opheilomen\). Paul feels a sense of obligation to keep on giving thanks to God (\eucharistein ti thei\, present infinitive with dative case) because of God's continued blessings on the Thessalonians. He uses the same idiom again in strkjv@2:13| and nowhere else in his thanksgivings. It is not necessity (\dei\) that Paul here notes, but a sense of personal obligation as in strkjv@1John:2:6| (Milligan). {Even as it is meet} (\kaths axion estin\). \Opheilomen\ points to the divine, \axion\ to the human side of the obligation (Lightfoot), perhaps to cheer the fainthearted in a possible letter to him in reply to Paul's First Thessalonian epistle (Milligan). This adjective \axios\ is from \ag\, to drag down the scales, and so weighty, worthy, worthwhile, old word and appropriate here. {For that your faith groweth exceedingly} (\hoti huperauxanei h pistis humn\). Causal use of \hoti\ referring to the obligation stated in \opheilomen\. The verb \huperauxan\ is one of Paul's frequent compounds in \huper\ (\huper-bain\, strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:6|; \huper-ek-tein\, strkjv@2Corinthians:10:14|; \huper-en-tugchan\, strkjv@Romans:8:26|; \huper-nika\, strkjv@Romans:8:37|; \huper-pleonaz\, strkjv@1Timothy:1:14|) and occurs only here in N.T. and rare elsewhere (Galen, Dio Cass.). Figure of the tree of faith growing above (\huper\) measure. Cf. parable of Jesus about faith-like a grain of mustard seed (Matthew:13:31f.|). {Aboundeth} (\pleonazei\). Same verb in strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:12|, here a fulfilment of the prayer made there. Milligan finds _diffusive_ growth of love in this word because of "each one" (\henos hekastou\). Frame finds in this fulfilment of the prayer of strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:12| one proof that II Thessalonians is later than I Thessalonians.
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:2 @{To the end that} (\eis to\). One of Paul's favourite idioms for purpose, \eis to\ and the infinitive. {Ye be not quickly shaken} (\m taches saleuthnai humas\). First aorist passive infinitive of \saleu\, old verb to agitate, to cause to totter like a reed (Matthew:11:7|), the earth (Hebrews:12:26|). Usual negative \m\ and accusative of general reference \humas\ with the infinitive. {From your mind} (\apo tou noos\). Ablative case of nous, mind, reason, sober sense, "from your witte" (Wyclif), to "keep their heads." {Nor yet be troubled} (\mde throeisthai\). Old verb \throe\, to cry aloud (from \throos\, clamour, tumult), to be in a state of nervous excitement (present passive infinitive, as if it were going on), "a continued state of agitation following the definite shock received (\saleuthnai\)" (Milligan). {Either by spirit} (\mte dia pneumatos\). By ecstatic utterance (1Thessalonians:5:10|). The nervous fear that the coming was to be at once prohibited by \mde\ Paul divides into three sources by \mte, mte, mte\. No individual claim to divine revelation (the gift of prophecy) can justify the statement. {Or by word} (\mte dia logou\). Oral statement of a conversation with Paul (Lightfoot) to this effect {as from us}. An easy way to set aside Paul's first Epistle by report of a private remark from Paul. {Or by epistle as from us} (\mte di' epistols hs di' hmn\). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13-5:3| Paul had plainly said that Jesus would come as a thief in the night and had shown that the dead would not be left out in the rapture. But evidently some one claimed to have a private epistle from Paul which supported the view that Jesus was coming at once, {as that the day of the Lord is now present} (\hs hoti enestken h hmera tou kuriou\). Perfect active indicative of \enistmi\, old verb, to place in, but intransitive in this tense to stand in or at or near. Songs:"is imminent" (Lightfoot). The verb is common in the papyri. In strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22; strkjv@Romans:8:38| we have a contrast between \ta enestta\, the things present, and \ta mellonta\, the things future (to come). The use of \hs hoti\ may be disparaging here, though that is not true in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. In the _Koin_ it comes in the vernacular to mean simply "that" (Moulton, _Proleg_., p. 212), but that hardly seems the case in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1033). Here it means "to wit that," though "as that" or "as if" does not miss it much. Certainly it flatly denies that by conversation or by letter he had stated that the second coming was immediately at hand. "It is this misleading assertion that accounts both for the increased discouragement of the faint-hearted to encourage whom Paul writes strkjv@1:3-2:17|, and for the increased meddlesomeness of the idle brethren to warn whom Paul writes strkjv@3:1-18|" (Frame). It is enough to give one pause to note Paul's indignation over this use of his name by one of the over-zealous advocates of the view that Christ was coming at once. It is true that Paul was still alive, but, if such a "pious fraud" was so common and easily condoned as some today argue, it is difficult to explain Paul's evident anger. Moreover, Paul's words should make us hesitate to affirm that Paul definitely proclaimed the early return of Jesus. He hoped for it undoubtedly, but he did not specifically proclaim it as so many today assert and accuse him of misleading the early Christians with a false presentation.
rwp@Acts:9:4 @{He fell upon the earth} (\pesn epi tn gn\). Second aorist active participle. Songs:in strkjv@22:7| Paul says: "I fell unto the ground" (\epesa eis to edaphos\) using an old word rather than the common \gn\. In strkjv@26:14| Paul states that "we were all fallen to the earth" (\pantn katapesontn hmn eis tn gn\, genitive absolute construction). But here in verse 7| "the men that journeyed with him stood speechless" (\histkeisan eneoi\). But surely the points of time are different. In strkjv@26:14| Paul refers to the first appearance of the vision when all fell to the earth. Here in verse 7| Luke refers to what occurred after the vision when both Saul and the men had risen from the ground. {Saul, Saul} (\Saoul, Saoul\). The Hebrew form occurs also in strkjv@22:7; strkjv@26:14| where it is expressly stated that the voice was in the Hebrew (Aramaic) tongue as also in strkjv@9:17| (Ananias). Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 316) terms this use of \Saoul\ "the historian's sense of liturgical rhythm." For the repetition of names by Jesus note strkjv@Luke:10:41| (Martha, Martha), strkjv@Luke:22:31| (Simon, Simon). {Me} (\me\). In persecuting the disciples, Saul was persecuting Jesus, as the words of Jesus in verse 5| made plain. Christ had already spoken of the mystic union between himself and his followers (Matthew:10:40; strkjv@25:40,45; strkjv@John:15:1-5|). The proverb (Pindar) that Jesus quotes to Saul about kicking against the goad is genuine in strkjv@26:14|, but not here.
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:20:11 @{When he was gone up} (\anabas\). Second aorist active participle in sharp contrast to \katabas\ (went down) of verse 10|. {Had broken bread} (\klasas ton arton\). Probably the Eucharist to observe which ordinance Paul had come and tarried (verse 7|), though some scholars distinguish between what took place in verse 7| and verse 11|, needlessly so as was stated on verse 7|. {And eaten} (\kai geusamenos\). The word is used in strkjv@10:10| of eating an ordinary meal and so might apply to the \Agap\, but it suits equally for the Eucharist. The accident had interrupted Paul's sermon so that it was observed now and then Paul resumed his discourse. {And had talked with them a long while} (\eph' hikanon te homilsas\). Luke, as we have seen, is fond of \hikanos\ for periods of time, for a considerable space of time, "even till break of day" (\achri augs\). Old word for brightness, radiance like German _Auge_, English eye, only here in the N.T. Occurs in the papyri and in modern Greek for dawn. This second discourse lasted from midnight till dawn and was probably more informal (as in strkjv@10:27|) and conversational (\homilsas\, though our word homiletics comes from \homile\) than the discourse before midnight (\dialegomai\, verses 7,9|). He had much to say before he left. {Songs:he departed} (\houts exlthen\). Thus Luke sums up the result. Paul left (went forth) only after all the events narrated by the numerous preceding participles had taken place. Effective aorist active indicative \exelthen\. \Houts\ here equals \tum demum\, now at length (Acts:27:7|) as Page shows.
rwp@Colossians:1:17 @{Before all things} (\pro pantn\). \Pro\ with the ablative case. This phrase makes Paul's meaning plain. The precedence of Christ in time and the preeminence as Creator are both stated sharply. See the claim of Jesus to eternal timeless existence in strkjv@John:8:58; strkjv@17:5|. See also strkjv@Revelation:23:13| where Christ calls himself the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning (\arch\) and the End (\telos\). Paul states it also in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {Consist} (\sunestken\). Perfect active indicative (intransitive) of \sunistmi\, old verb, to place together and here to cohere, to hold together. The word repeats the statements in verse 16|, especially that in the form \ektistai\. Christ is the controlling and unifying force in nature. The Gnostic philosophy that matter is evil and was created by a remote aeon is thus swept away. The Son of God's love is the Creator and the Sustainer of the universe which is not evil.
rwp@Colossians:2:13 @{And you} (\kai humas\). Emphatic position, object of the verb \sunezopoisen\ (did he quicken) and repeated (second \hums\). You Gentiles as he explains. {Being dead through your trespasses} (\nekrous ontas tois paraptmasin\). Moral death, of course, as in strkjv@Romans:6:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,5|. Correct text does not have \en\, but even so \paraptmasin\ (from \parapipt\, to fall beside or to lapse, strkjv@Hebrews:6:6|), a lapse or misstep as in strkjv@Matthew:6:14; strkjv@Romans:5:15-18; strkjv@Galatians:6:1|, can be still in the locative, though the instrumental makes good sense also. {And the uncircumcision of your flesh} (\kai ti akroboustii ts sarkos humn\). "Dead in your trespasses and your alienation from God, of which the uncircumcision of your flesh was a symbol" (Abbott). Clearly so, "the uncircumcision" used merely in a metaphorical sense. {Did he quicken together with him} (\sunezopoisen sun auti\). First aorist active indicative of the double compound verb \sunzopoie\, to make alive (\zos, poie\) with (\sun\, repeated also with \auti\, associative instrumental), found only here and in strkjv@Ephesians:2:5|, apparently coined by Paul for this passage. Probably \theos\ (God) is the subject because expressly so stated in strkjv@Ephesians:2:4f.| and because demanded by \sun auti\ here referring to Christ. This can be true even if Christ be the subject of \rken\ in verse 14|. {Having forgiven us} (\charisamenos hmin\). First aorist middle participle of \charizomai\, common verb from \charis\ (favour, grace). Dative of the person common as in strkjv@3:13|. The act of forgiving is simultaneous with the quickening, though logically antecedent.
rwp@Ephesians:5:26 @{That he might sanctify it} (\hina autn hagiasi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hagiaz\. Jesus stated this as his longing and his prayer (John:17:17-19|). This was the purpose of Christ's death (verse 25|). {Having cleansed it} (\katharisas\). First aorist active participle of \kathariz\, to cleanse, either simultaneous action or antecedent. {By the washing of water} (\ti loutri tou hudatos\). If \loutron\ only means bath or bathing-place ( = \loutron\), then \loutri\ is in the locative. If it can mean bathing or washing, it is in the instrumental case. The usual meaning from Homer to the papyri is the bath or bathing-place, though some examples seem to mean bathing or washing. Salmond doubts if there are any clear instances. The only other N.T. example of \loutron\ is in strkjv@Titus:3:5|. The reference here seems to be to the baptismal bath (immersion) of water, "in the bath of water." See strkjv@1Corinthians:6:11| for the bringing together of \apelousasthe\ and \hgiasthte\. Neither there nor here does Paul mean that the cleansing or sanctification took place in the bath save in a symbolic fashion as in strkjv@Romans:6:4-6|. Some think that Paul has also a reference to the bath of the bride before marriage. Still more difficult is the phrase "with the word" (\en rmati\). In strkjv@John:17:17| Jesus connected "truth" with "sanctify." That is possible here, though it may also be connected with \katharisas\ (having cleansed). Some take it to mean the baptismal formula.
rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE PICTURE OF CHRIST At once we are challenged by the bold stand taken by the author concerning the Person of Christ as superior to the prophets of the Old Testament because he is the Son of God through whom God has spoken in the new dispensation (Hebrews:1:1-3|), this Son who is God's Agent in the work of creation and of grace as we see it stated in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11; strkjv@Colossians:1:13-20; strkjv@John:1:1-18|. This high doctrine of Jesus as God's Son with the glory and stamp of God's nature is never lowered, for as God's Son he is superior to angels (Hebrews:1:4-2:4|), though the humanity of Jesus is recognized as one proof of the glory of Jesus (Hebrews:2:5-18|). Jesus is shown to be superior to Moses as God's Son over God's house (Hebrews:3:1-4:13|), But the chief portion of the Epistle is devoted to the superiority of Jesus Christ as priest to the work of Aaron and the whole Levitical line (Hebrews:4:14-12:3|). Here the author with consummate skill, though with rabbinical refinements at times, shows that Jesus is like Melchizedek and so superior to Aaron (Hebrews:4:14-7:28|), works under a better covenant of grace (Hebrews:8:1-13|), works in a better sanctuary which is in heaven (Hebrews:9:1-12|), offers a better sacrifice which is his own blood (Hebrews:9:13-10:18|), and gives us better promises for the fulfilment of his task (Hebrews:10:19-12:3|). Hence this Epistle deserves to be called the Epistle of the Priesthood of Christ. Songs:W. P. Du Bose calls his exposition of the book, _High Priesthood and Sacrifice_ (1908). This conception of Christ as our Priest who offered himself on the Cross and as our Advocate with the Father runs all through the New Testament (Mark:10:46; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@John:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Romans:8:32; strkjv@1Peter:1:18f.; strkjv@1John:2:1f.; strkjv@Revelation:5:9|, etc.). But it is in Hebrews that we have the full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as our Priest and Redeemer. The Glory of Jesus runs through the whole book.
rwp@Hebrews:2:14 @{Are sharers in flesh and blood} (\kekoinnken haimatos kai sarkos\). The best MSS. read "blood and flesh." The verb is perfect active indicative of \koinne\, old verb with the regular genitive, elsewhere in the N.T. with the locative (Romans:12:13|) or with \en\ or \eis\. "The children have become partners (\koinnoi\) in blood and flesh." {Partook} (\metesche\). Second aorist active indicative of \metech\, to have with, a practical synonym for \koinne\ and with the genitive also (\tn autn\). That he might bring to nought (\hina katargsi\). Purpose of the incarnation clearly stated with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \katarge\, old word to render idle or ineffective (from \kata, argos\), causative verb (25 times in Paul), once in Luke (Luke:13:7|), once in Hebrews (here). "By means of death" (his own death) Christ broke the power (\kratos\) of the devil over death (paradoxical as it seems), certainly in men's fear of death and in some unexplained way Satan had sway over the realm of death (Zechariah:3:5f.|). Note the explanatory \tout' estin\ (that is) with the accusative after it as before it. In strkjv@Revelation:12:7| Satan is identified with the serpent in Eden, though it is not done in the Old Testament. See strkjv@Romans:5:12; strkjv@John:8:44; strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11; strkjv@1John:3:12|. Death is the devil's realm, for he is the author of sin. "Death as death is no part of the divine order" (Westcott).
rwp@Hebrews:5:9 @{Having been made perfect} (\teleitheis\). First aorist passive participle of \teleio\, the completion of the process of training mentioned by this same verb in strkjv@2:10| "by means of sufferings" (\dia pathmatn\) as stated again here in verse 8|. {The author of eternal salvation} (\aitios strias ainiou\). Common adjective from \aitia\ (cause), causing, often in Greek with \strias\ (Aeschines, Philo), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Luke:23:4,14,22; strkjv@Acts:19:40|. See same idea in strkjv@Hebrews:2:10| (\archgon\). See strkjv@Isaiah:45:17|.
rwp@Hebrews:9:10 @{Only with meats and drinks and divers washings} (\monon epi brmasin kai pomasin kai diaphorois baptismois\). The parenthesis of the Revised Version here is unnecessary. The use of \epi\ here with the locative case is regular, "in the matter of" (Luke:12:52; strkjv@John:12:16; strkjv@Acts:21:24|). What ritual value these Levitical sacrifices had was confined to minute regulations about diet and ceremonial cleansing (clean and unclean). For "divers" (\diaphorois\, late adjective, in N.T. only in strkjv@Hebrews:1:4; strkjv@8:6; strkjv@9:10; strkjv@Romans:12:6|) say "different" or "various." \Baptismois\ is, of course, the Jewish ceremonial immersions (cf. strkjv@Mark:7:4; strkjv@Exodus:29:4; strkjv@Leviticus:11:25,28f.; strkjv@Numbers:8:7; strkjv@Revelation:6:2|). {Carnal ordinances} (\dikaimasin sarkos\). But the correct text is undoubtedly simply \dikaimata sarkos\ (nominative case), in apposition with \dra te kai thusiai\ (gifts and sacrifices). See strkjv@9:1| for \dikaimata\. {Imposed} (\epikeimena\). Present middle or passive participle of \epikeimai\, old verb to lie upon (be laid upon). Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:9:16|. {Until a time of reformation} (\mechri kairou diorthses\). Definite statement of the temporary nature of the Levitical system already stated in strkjv@7:10-17; strkjv@8:13| and argued clearly by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3:15-22|. \Diorthsis\ is a late word, here alone in N.T. (from \diortho\, to set right or straight), used by Hippocrates for making straight misshapen limbs like \anortho\ in strkjv@Hebrews:12:12|. Here for reformation like \diorthma\ (reform) in strkjv@Acts:24:2f|. Christianity itself is the great Reformation of the current Judaism (Pharisaism) and the spiritual Judaism foreshadowed by the old Abrahamic promise (see strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9|).
rwp@Hebrews:9:28 @{Once} (\hapax\). "Once for all" (verse 26|) as already stated. {Shall appear a second time} (\ek deuterou ophthsetai\). Future passive indicative of \hora\. Blessed assurance of the Second Coming of Christ, but this time "apart from sin" (\chris hamartias\, no notion of a second chance then). {Unto salvation} (\eis strian\). Final and complete salvation for "them that wait for him" (\tois auton apekdechomenois\). Dative plural of the articular participle present middle of \apekdechomai\, the very verb used by Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:3:20| of waiting for the coming of Christ as Saviour.
rwp@Hebrews:11:4 @{A more excellent sacrifice} (\pleiona thusian\). Literally, "more sacrifice" (comparative of \polus\, much). For this rather free use of \plein\ with the point implied rather than stated see strkjv@Matthew:6:25; strkjv@Luke:10:31; strkjv@12:23; strkjv@Hebrews:3:3|. {Than Cain} (\para Kain\). For this use of \para\ after comparative see strkjv@1:4,9|. For the incident see strkjv@Genesis:4:4|. {Through which} (\di' hs\). The sacrifice (\thusia\). {He had Witness borne to him} (\emarturth\). First aorist passive indicative of \marture\ as in verse 2|, "he was witnessed to." {That he was righteous} (\einai dikaios\). Infinitive in indirect discourse after \emarturth\, personal construction of \dikaios\ (predicate nominative after \einai\) agreeing with the subject of \emarturth\ (cf. strkjv@Romans:1:22|, \einai sophoi\). {God bearing witness} (\marturountos tou theou\). Genitive absolute with present active participle of \marture\. {Through it} (\di' auts\). Through his faith (as shown by his sacrifice). Precisely why Abel's sacrifice was better than that of Cain apart from his faith is not shown. {Being dead} (\apothann\). Second aorist active participle of \apothnsk\, "having died." {Yet speaketh} (\eti lalei\). Cf. strkjv@Genesis:4:10; strkjv@Hebrews:12:24|. Speaks still through his faith.
rwp@James:3:7 @{Kind} (\phusis\). Old word from \phu\, order of nature (Romans:1:26|), here of all animals and man, in strkjv@2Peter:1:4| of God and redeemed men. {Of beasts} (\thrin\). Old word diminutive from \thr\ and so "little beasts" originally, then wild animals in general (Mark:1:13|), or quadrupeds as here. These four classes of animals come from strkjv@Genesis:9:2f|. {Birds} (\peteinn\). Old word for flying animals (from \petomai\, to word from \herp\, to crawl (Latin _serpo_), hence serpents. {Things in the sea} (\enalin\). Old adjective (\en, hals\, sea, salt) in the sea, here only in N.T. The four groups are put in two pairs here by the use of \te kai\ with the first two and the second two. See a different classification in strkjv@Acts:10:12; strkjv@11:6|. {Is tamed} (\damazetai\). Present passive indicative of \damaz\, old verb kin to Latin _dominus_ and English tame, in N.T. only in this passage and strkjv@Mark:5:4|. The present tense gives the general picture of the continuous process through the ages of man's lordship over the animals as stated in strkjv@Genesis:1:28|. {Hath been tamed} (\dedamastai\). Perfect passive indicative of the same verb, repeated to present the state of conquest in some cases (domestic animals, for instance). {By mankind} (\ti phusei ti anthrpini\). Instrumental case with repeated article and repetition also of \phusis\, "by the nature the human." For \anthrpinos\ see strkjv@Acts:17:25|.
rwp@John:1:13 @{Which were born} (\hoi egennthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \genna\, to beget, "who were begotten." By spiritual generation (of God, \ek theou\), not by physical (\ex haimatn\, plural as common in classics and O.T., though why it is not clear unless blood of both father and mother; \ek thelmatos sarkos\, from sexual desire; \ek thelmatos andros\, from the will of the male). But _b_ of the old Latin reads _qui natus est_ and makes it refer to Christ and so expressly teach the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Likewise Irenaeus reads _qui natus est_ as does Tertullian who argues that _qui nati sunt_ (\hoi egennthsan\) is an invention of the Valentinian Gnostics. Blass (_Philology of the Gospels_, p. 234) opposes this reading, but all the old Greek uncials read \hoi egennthsan\ and it must be accepted. The Virgin Birth is doubtless implied in verse 14|, but it is not stated in verse 13|.
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:4:24 @{God is a Spirit} (\pneuma ho theos\). More precisely, "God is Spirit" as "God is Light" (1John:1:5|), "God is Love" (1John:4:8|). In neither case can we read Spirit is God, Light is God, Love is God. The non-corporeality of God is clearly stated and the personality of God also. All this is put in three words for the first time. {Must} (\dei\). Here is the real necessity (\dei\), not the one used by the woman about the right place of worship (verse 20|).
rwp@John:5:26 @{In himself} (\en heauti\). The Living God possesses life wholly in himself and so he has bestowed this power of life to the Son as already stated in the Prologue of the Logos (1:3|). For "gave" (\edken\, timeless aorist active indicative) see also strkjv@3:35; strkjv@17:2,24|. The particles "as" (\hsper\) and "so" (\houts\) mark here the fact, not the degree (Westcott).
rwp@John:6:10 @{Sit down} (\anapesein\). Literally, "fall back," lie down, recline. Second aorist active infinitive of \anapipt\. {Much grass} (\chortos polus\). Old word for pasture, green grass (Mark:6:39|) or hay (1Corinthians:3:12|). It was spring (John:6:4|) and plenty of green grass on the hillside. {The men} (\hoi andres\). Word for men as distinct from women, expressly stated in strkjv@Matthew:14:21|. {In number} (\ton arithmon\). Adverbial accusative (of general reference). {About} (\hos\). General estimate, though they were arranged in orderly groups by hundreds and fifties, "in ranks" like "garden beds" (\prasiai\, strkjv@Mark:6:40|).
rwp@John:7:3 @{His brethren} (\hoi adelphoi autou\). "His brothers" (half-brothers actually), who "were not believing on him" (\oude episteuon eis auton\) as stated in verse 5|. They were hostile to the Messianic assumptions of Jesus, a natural attitude as one can well see, though at first they were friendly (2:12|). {Depart hence} (\metabthi enteuthen\). Second aorist active imperative of \metabain\, to pass to another place (5:24; strkjv@13:1|). It was impertinence on their part. {That thy disciples also may behold} (\hina kai hoi mathtai sou thersousin\). Final clause with \hina\ and the future active indicative of \there\. Jesus had many disciples in Judea at the start (2:23; strkjv@4:1|) and had left it because of the jealousy of the Pharisees over his success (4:3|). The brothers may have heard of the great defection in the synagogue in Capernaum (6:66|), but the advice is clearly ironical. {Which thou doest} (\ha poieis\). To what works they refer by this language we do not know. But Jesus had been away from Galilee for some months and from Judea for a year and a half. Perhaps the brothers of Jesus may actually have been eager to rush Jesus into the hostile atmosphere of Jerusalem again.
rwp@John:7:8 @{Go ye up to the feast} (\humeis anabte eis tn heortn\). The emphatic word by position is \humeis\ (ye) in contrast with \eg\ (I). Second aorist active imperative of \anabain\, old and common verb for going up to the feast (2:13|) or anywhere. Take your own advice (7:3|). {I go not up yet} (\eg oup anabain\). Songs:Westcott and Hort after B W L (Neutral) while \ou\ (not) is read by Aleph D, African Latin, Vulgate, Coptic (Western). Some of the early Greek Fathers were puzzled over the reading \ouk\ (I go not up) as contradictory to verse 10| wherein it is stated that Jesus did go up. Almost certainly \ouk\ (not) is correct and is not really contradictory when one notes in verse 10| that the manner of Christ's going up is precisely the opposite of the advice of the brothers in verses 3,4|. "Not yet" (\oup\) is genuine before "fulfilled" (\peplrtai\, perfect passive indicative of \plro\). One may think, if he will, that Jesus changed his plans after these words, but that is unnecessary. He simply refused to fall in with his brothers' sneering proposal for a grand Messianic procession with the caravan on the way to the feast. He will do that on the journey to the last passover.
rwp@John:8:19 @{Where is thy Father?} (\pou estin ho patr sou;\). "The testimony of an unseen and unheard witness would not satisfy them" (Vincent). Bernard understands the Pharisees to see that Jesus claims God the Father as his second witness and so ask "where," not "who" he is. Augustine has it: _Patrem Christi carnaliter acceperunt_, Christ's human father, as if the Pharisees were "misled perhaps by the Lord's use of \anthrpon\ (verse 17|)" (Dods). Cyril even took it to be a coarse allusion to the birth of Jesus as a bastard according to the Talmud. Perhaps the Pharisees used the question with _double entendre_, even with all three ideas dancing in their hostile minds. {Ye would know my Father also} (\kai ton patera mou an ideite\). Conclusion of second-class condition determined as unfulfilled with \an\ and second perfect active of \oida\ used as imperfect in both condition and conclusion. See this same point made to Philip in strkjv@14:9|. In strkjv@14:7| Jesus will use \ginsk\ in the condition and \oida\ in the conclusion. The ignorance of the Pharisees about Jesus proves it and is due to their ignorance of the Father. See this point more fully stated in strkjv@5:36-38| when Jesus had his previous controversy in Jerusalem. In strkjv@7:28| Jesus said that they knew his home in Nazareth, but he denied then that they knew the Father who sent him. Jesus will again on this occasion (8:55|) deny their knowledge of the Father. Later he will deny their knowledge of the Father and of the Son (16:3|). The Pharisees are silenced for the moment.
rwp@John:10:28 @{And I give unto them eternal life} (\kag didmi autois zn ainion\). This is the gift of Jesus now to his sheep as stated in strkjv@6:27,40| (cf. strkjv@1John:2:25; strkjv@5:11|). {And they shall never perish} (\kai ou m apolntai\). Emphatic double negative with second aorist middle (intransitive) subjunctive of \apollumi\, to destroy. The sheep may feel secure (3:16; strkjv@6:39; strkjv@17:12; strkjv@18:9|). {And no one shall snatch them out of my hand} (\kai ouch harpasei tis auta ek ts cheiros mou\). Jesus had promised this security in Galilee (6:37,39|). No wolf, no thief, no bandit, no hireling, no demon, not even the devil can pluck the sheep out of my hand. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:3:3| (Your life is hid together with Christ in God).
rwp@John:10:33 @{For a good work we stone thee not} (\peri kalou ergou ou lithazomen\). "Concerning a good deed we are not stoning thee." Flat denial that the healing of the blind man on the Sabbath had led them to this attempt (8:59|) in spite of the facts. {But for blasphemy} (\alla peri blasphmias\). See strkjv@Acts:26:7| where \peri\ with the genitive is also used with \egkaloumai\ for the charge against Paul. This is the only example in John of the word \blasphmia\ (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:31|). {And because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God} (\kai hoti su anthrpos n poieis seauton theon\). In strkjv@5:18| they stated the charge more accurately: "He called God his own Father, making himself equal with God." That is, he made himself the Son of God. This he did beyond a doubt. But was it blasphemy? Only if he was not the Son of God. The penalty for blasphemy was death by stoning (Leviticus:24:16; strkjv@1Kings:21:10,13|).
rwp@John:11:27 @{Yea, Lord} (\Nai, kurie\). Martha probably did not understand all that Jesus said and meant, but she did believe in the future resurrection, in eternal life for believers in Christ, in the power of Christ to raise even the dead here and now. She had heroic faith and makes now her own confession of faith in words that outrank those of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:16| because she makes hers with her brother dead now four days and with the hope that Jesus will raise him up now. {I have believed} (\pepisteuka\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu\. It is my settled and firm faith. Peter uses this same tense in strkjv@6:69|. {That thou art the Son of God} (\hoti su ei ho Christos ho huios tou theou\). The Messiah or the Christ (1:41|) was to be also "the Son of God" as the Baptist said he had found Jesus to be (1:34|), as Peter confessed on Hermon for the apostles (Matthew:16:16|), as Jesus claimed to be (John:11:41|) and confessed on oath before Caiaphas that he was (Matthew:26:63f.|), and as John stated that it was his purpose to prove in his Gospel (20:31|). But no one said it under more trying circumstances than Martha. {Even he that cometh into the world} (\ho eis ton kosmon erchomenos\). No "even" in the Greek. This was a popular way of putting the people's expectation (6:14; strkjv@Matthew:11:3|). Jesus himself spoke of his coming into the world (9:39; strkjv@16:28; strkjv@8:37|).
rwp@John:11:34 @{Where have ye laid him?} (\Pou tetheikate auton;\). Perfect active indicative of \tithmi\. A simple question for information. The only other like it in John is in strkjv@6:6| where it is expressly stated that Jesus knew what he was going to do. Songs:it was here, only he politely asked for direction to the tomb of Lazarus. The people invite him to come and see, the very language used by Philip to Nathanael (1:46|). It was a natural and polite reply as they would show Jesus the way, but they had no idea of his purpose.
rwp@John:14:10 @{Believest thou not?} (\ou pisteueis;\). Jesus had a right to expect greater faith from these men than from the blind man (9:35|) or Martha (11:27|). His words in strkjv@14:1| are clearly needed. This oneness with the Father Jesus had already stated (10:38|) as shown by his "words" (\rmata\) and his "works" (\erga\). Cf. strkjv@3:34; strkjv@5:19; strkjv@6:62|.
rwp@John:18:36 @{My kingdom} (\h basileia h em\). Christ claims to be king to Pilate, but of a peculiar kingdom. For "world" (\kosmou\) see strkjv@17:13-18|. {My servants} (\hoi hupretai hoi emoi\). For the word see verse 3| where it means the temple police or guards (literally, under-rowers). In the LXX always (Proverbs:14:35; strkjv@Isaiah:32:5; strkjv@Daniel:3:46|) officers of a king as here. Christ then had only a small band of despised followers who could not fight against Caesar. Was he alluding also to legions of angels on his side? (Matthew:26:56|). {Would fight} (\gnizonto an\). Imperfect middle of \agnizomai\ common verb (only here in John, but see strkjv@1Corinthians:9:25|) from \agn\ (contest) with \an\, a conclusion of the second-class condition (assumed as untrue). Christians should never forget the profound truth stated here by Jesus. {That I should not be delivered} (\hina m paradoth\). Negative final clause with \hina m\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \paradidmi\ (see verses 28,36|). Jesus expects Pilate to surrender to the Jews. {But now} (\nun de\). In contrast to the condition already stated as in strkjv@8:40; strkjv@9:41; strkjv@15:22,24|.
rwp@John:19:11 @{Thou wouldest have} (\ouk eiches\). Imperfect active indicative without \an\, but apodosis of second-class condition as in strkjv@15:22,24|. {Except it were given thee} (\ei m n dedomenon\). Periphrastic past perfect indicative of \didmi\ (a permanent possession). {From above} (\anthen\). From God (cf. strkjv@3:3|), the same doctrine of government stated by Paul in strkjv@Romans:13:1f|. Pilate did not get his "authority" from the Sanhedrin, but from Caesar. Jesus makes God the source of all real "authority." {Hath greater sin} (\meizona hamartian echei\). The same idiom in strkjv@9:41|. Caiaphas has his authority from God also and has used Pilate for his own base end.
rwp@Luke:2:33 @{His father and his mother} (\ho patr autou kai h mtr\). Luke had already used "parents" in strkjv@2:27|. He by no means intends to deny the Virgin Birth of Jesus so plainly stated in strkjv@1:34-38|. He merely employs here the language of ordinary custom. The late MSS. wrongly read "and Joseph" instead of "his father." {Were marvelling} (\n thaumazontes\). The masculine gender includes the feminine when both are referred to. But \n\ is singular, not \san\, the normal imperfect plural in this periphrastic imperfect. This is due to the wide space between copula and participle. The copula \n\ agrees in number with \ho patr\ while the participle coming last agrees with both \ho pater kai h mtr\ (cf. strkjv@Matthew:17:3; strkjv@22:40|). If one wonders why they marvelled at Simeon's words after what they had heard from Gabriel, Elisabeth, and the Shepherds, he should bear in mind that every parent is astonished and pleased at the fine things others see in the child. It is a mark of unusual insight for others to see so much that is obvious to the parent. Simeon's prophecy had gone beyond the angel's outline and it was surprising that he should know anything about the child's destiny.
rwp@Luke:4:16 @{Where he had been brought up} (\hou n tethrammenos\). Past perfect passive periphrastic indicative, a state of completion in past time, from \treph\, a common Greek verb. This visit is before that recorded in strkjv@Mark:6:1-6; strkjv@Matthew:13:54-58| which was just before the third tour of Galilee. Here Jesus comes back after a year of public ministry elsewhere and with a wide reputation (Luke:4:15|). Luke may have in mind strkjv@2:51|, but for some time now Nazareth had not been his home and that fact may be implied by the past perfect tense. {As his custom was} (\kata to eithos auti\). Second perfect active neuter singular participle of an old \eth\ (Homer), to be accustomed. Literally according to what was customary to him (\auti\, dative case). This is one of the flashlights on the early life of Jesus. He had the habit of going to public worship in the synagogue as a boy, a habit that he kept up when a grown man. If the child does not form the habit of going to church, the man is almost certain not to have it. We have already had in Matthew and Mark frequent instances of the word synagogue which played such a large part in Jewish life after the restoration from Babylon. {Stood up} (\anest\). Second aorist active indicative and intransitive. Very common verb. It was the custom for the reader to stand except when the Book of Esther was read at the feast of Purim when he might sit. It is not here stated that Jesus had been in the habit of standing up to read here or elsewhere. It was his habit to go to the synagogue for worship. Since he entered upon his Messianic work his habit was to teach in the synagogues (Luke:4:15|). This was apparently the first time that he had done so in Nazareth. He may have been asked to read as Paul was in Antioch in Pisidia (Acts:13:15|). The ruler of the synagogue for that day may have invited Jesus to read and speak because of his now great reputation as a teacher. Jesus could have stood up voluntarily and appropriately because of his interest in his home town. {To read} (\anagnnai\). Second aorist active infinitive of \anaginsk\, to recognize again the written characters and so to read and then to read aloud. It appears first in Pindar in the sense of read and always so in the N.T. This public reading aloud with occasional comments may explain the parenthesis in strkjv@Matthew:24:15| (Let him that readeth understand).
rwp@Luke:4:44 @{Was preaching} (\n krussn\). Periphrastic imperfect active, describing his first tour of Galilee in accord with the purpose just stated. One must fill in details, though strkjv@Mark:1:39| and strkjv@Matthew:8:23-25| tell of the mass of work done on this campaign.
rwp@Luke:8:2 @{Which had been healed} (\hai san tetherapeumenai\). Periphrastic past perfect passive, suggesting that the healing had taken place some time before this tour. These women all had personal grounds of gratitude to Jesus. {From whom seven devils (demons) had gone out} (\aph' hs daimonia hepta exelluthei\). Past perfect active third singular for the \daimonia\ are neuter plural. This first mention of Mary Magdalene describes her special cause of gratitude. This fact is stated also in strkjv@Mark:16:9| in the disputed close of the Gospel. The presence of seven demons in one person indicates special malignity (Mark:5:9|). See strkjv@Matthew:17:45| for the parable of the demon who came back with seven other demons worse than the first. It is not known where Magdala was, whence Mary came.
rwp@Luke:9:2 @{He sent them forth} (\apesteilen autous\). First aorist active indicative of \apostell\. {To preach the kingdom of God and to heal the sick} (\krussein tn basileian tou theou kai isthai\). Present indicative for the continuous functions during this campaign. This double office of herald (\krussein\) and healer (\isthai\) is stated directly in strkjv@Matthew:10:7-8|. Note the verb \iaomai\ for healing here, though \therapeuein\ in verse 1|, apparently used interchangeably.
rwp@Luke:9:51 @{When the days were well-nigh come} (\en ti sumplrousthai tas hmeras\). Luke's common idiom \en\ with the articular infinitive, "in the being fulfilled as to the days." This common compound occurs in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:8:23; strkjv@Acts:2:1|. The language here makes it plain that Jesus was fully conscious of the time of his death as near as already stated (Luke:9:22,27,31|). {That he should be received up} (\ts analmpses autou\). Literally, "of his taking up." It is an old word (from Hippocrates on), but here alone in the N.T. It is derived from \analamban\ (the verb used of the Ascension, strkjv@Acts:1:2,11,22; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16|) and refers here to the Ascension of Jesus after His Resurrection. Not only in John's Gospel (John:17:5|) does Jesus reveal a yearning for a return to the Father, but it is in the mind of Christ here as evidently at the Transfiguration (9:31|) and later in strkjv@Luke:12:49f|. {He steadfastly set his face} (\autos to prospon estrisen\). Note emphatic \autos\, {he himself}, with fixedness of purpose in the face of difficulty and danger. This look on Christ's face as he went to his doom is noted later in strkjv@Mark:10:32|. It is a Hebraistic idiom (nine times in Ezekiel), this use of face here, but the verb (effective aorist active) is an old one from \striz\ (from \strigx\, a support), to set fast, to fix. {To go to Jerusalem} (\tou poreuesthai eis Ierousalm\). Genitive infinitive of purpose. Luke three times mentions Christ making his way to Jerusalem (9:51; strkjv@13:22; strkjv@17:11|) and John mentions three journeys to Jerusalem during the later ministry (John:7:10; strkjv@11:17; strkjv@12:1|). It is natural to take these journeys to be the same in each of these Gospels. Luke does not make definite location of each incident and John merely supplements here and there. But in a broad general way they seem to correspond.
rwp@Luke:20:20 @{They watched him} (\paratrsantes\). First aorist active participle of \paratre\, a common Greek verb to watch on the side or insidiously or with evil intent as in strkjv@Luke:6:7| (\paretrounto\) of the scribes and Pharisees. See on ¯Mark:3:2|. There is no "him" in the Greek. They were watching their chance. {Spies} (\enkathetous\). An old verbal adjective from \enkathimi\, to send down in or secretly. It means liers in wait who are suborned to spy out, one who is hired to trap one by crafty words. Only here in the N.T. {Feigned themselves} (\hupokrinomenous heautous\). Hypocritically professing to be "righteous" (\dikaious\). "They posed as scrupulous persons with a difficulty of conscience" (Plummer). {That they might take hold of his speech} (\hina epilabntai autou logou\). Second aorist middle of \epilamban\, an old verb for seizing hold with the hands and uses as here the genitive case. These spies are for the purpose of (\hina\) catching hold of the talk of Jesus if they can get a grip anywhere. This is their direct purpose and the ultimate purpose or result is also stated, "so as to deliver him up" (\hste paradounai auton\). Second aorist active infinitive of \paradidmi\, to hand over, to give from one's side to another. The trap is all set now and ready to be sprung by these "spies." {Of the governor} (\tou hgemonos\). The Sanhedrin knew that Pilate would have to condemn Jesus if he were put to death. Songs:then all their plans focus on this point as the goal. Luke alone mentions this item here.
rwp@Luke:20:42 @{For David himself} (\autos gar Daueid\). This language of Jesus clearly means that he treats David as the author of strkjv@Psalms:110|. The inspiration of this Psalm is expressly stated in strkjv@Mark:12:36; strkjv@Matthew:22:43| (which see) and the Messianic character of the Psalm in all three Synoptics who all quote the LXX practically alike. Modern criticism that denies the Davidic authorship of this Psalm has to say either that Jesus was ignorant of the fact about it or that he declined to disturb the current acceptation of the Davidic authorship. Certainly modern scholars are not agreed on the authorship of strkjv@Psalms:110|. Meanwhile one can certainly be excused for accepting the natural implication of the words of Jesus here, "David himself." {In the book of the Psalms} (\en bibli Psalmn\). Compare strkjv@3:4| "in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet."
rwp@Mark:4:11 @{Unto you is given the mystery of the kingdom of God} (\Humin to mustrion dedotai ts basileias tou theou\). See on ¯Matthew:13:11| for word \mustrion\. Here (Mark:4:11; strkjv@Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Luke:8:10|) alone in the Gospels, but in Paul 21 times and in the Revelation 4 times. It is frequent in Daniel and O.T. Apocrypha. Matthew and Luke use it here in the plural. Matthew and Luke add the word {to know} (\gnnai\), but Mark's presentation covers a wider range than growing knowledge, the permanent possession of the mystery even before they understand it. The secret is no longer hidden from the initiated. Discipleship means initiation into the secret of God's kingdom and it will come gradually to these men. {But unto them that are without} (\ekeinois de tois ex\). Peculiar to Mark, those outside our circle, the uninitiated, the hostile group like the scribes and Pharisees, who were charging Jesus with being in league with Beelzebub. strkjv@Luke:8:10| has "to the rest" (\tois loipois\), strkjv@Matthew:13:11| simply "to them" (\ekeinois\). Without the key the parables are hard to understand, for parables veil the truth of the kingdom being stated in terms of another realm. Without a spiritual truth and insight they are unintelligible and are often today perverted. The parables are thus a condemnation on the wilfully blind and hostile, while a guide and blessing to the enlightened. {That} (\hina\). Mark has the construction of the Hebrew "lest" of strkjv@Isaiah:6:9f|. with the subjunctive and so strkjv@Luke:8:10|, while strkjv@Matthew:13:13| uses causal \hoti\ with the indicative following the LXX. See on ¯Matthew:13:13| for the so-called causal use of \hina\. Gould on strkjv@Mark:4:12| has an intelligent discussion of the differences between Matthew and Mark and Luke. He argues that Mark here probably "preserves the original form of Jesus' saying." God ironically commands Isaiah to harden the hearts of the people. If the notion of purpose is preserved in the use of \hina\ in Mark and Luke, there is probably some irony also in the sad words of Jesus. If \hina\ is given the causative use of \hoti\ in Matthew, the difficulty disappears. What is certain is that the use of parables on this occasion was a penalty for judicial blindness on those who will not see.
rwp@Mark:4:22 @{Save that it should be manifested} (\ean m hina phanerthi\). Note \ean m\ and \hina\. strkjv@Luke:8:17| has it {that shall not be made manifest} (\ho ou phaneron gensetai\). Here in Mark it is stated that the temporary concealment is for final manifestation and a means to that end. Those who are charged with the secret at this time are given the set responsibility of proclaiming it on the housetops after Ascension (Swete). The hidden (\krupton\) and the {secret} (\apokruphon\) are to be revealed in due time.
rwp@Mark:10:11 @Mark does not give the exception stated in strkjv@Matthew:19:9| "except for fornication" which see for discussion, though the point is really involved in what Mark does record. Mere formal divorce does not annul actual marriage consummated by the physical union. Breaking that bond does annul it.
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:2:1 @{Now when Jesus was born} (\tou de Isou gennthentos\). The fact of the birth of Jesus is stated by the genitive absolute construction (first aorist passive participle of the same verb \genna\ used twice already of the birth of Jesus, strkjv@1:16,20|, and used in the genealogy, strkjv@1:2-16|). Matthew does not propose to give biographic details of the supernatural birth of Jesus, wonderful as it was and disbelieved as it is by some today who actually deny that Jesus was born at all or ever lived, men who talk of the Jesus Myth, the Christ Myth, etc. "The main purpose is to show the reception given by the world to the new-born Messianic King. Homage from afar, hostility at home; foreshadowing the fortunes of the new faith: reception by the Gentiles, rejection by the Jews" (Bruce).
rwp@Matthew:6:2 @{Sound not a trumpet} (\m salpisis\). Is this literal or metaphorical? No actual instance of such conduct has been found in the Jewish writings. McNeile suggests that it may refer to the blowing of trumpets in the streets on the occasion of public fasts. Vincent suggests the thirteen trumpet-shaped chests of the temple treasury to receive contributions (Luke:21:2|). But at Winona Lake one summer a missionary from India named Levering stated to me that he had seen Hindu priests do precisely this very thing to get a crowd to see their beneficences. Songs:it looks as if the rabbis could do it also. Certainly it was in keeping with their love of praise. And Jesus expressly says that "the hypocrites" (\hoi hupokritai\) do this very thing. This is an old word for actor, interpreter, one who personates another, from \hupokrinomai\ to answer in reply like the Attic \apokrinomai\. Then to pretend, to feign, to dissemble, to act the hypocrite, to wear a mask. This is the hardest word that Jesus has for any class of people and he employs it for these pious pretenders who pose as perfect. {They have received their reward} (\apechousin ton misthon autn\). This verb is common in the papyri for receiving a receipt, "they have their receipt in full," all the reward that they will get, this public notoriety. "They can sign the receipt of their reward" (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 229). Songs:_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 110f. \Apoch\ means "receipt." Songs:also in strkjv@6:5|.
rwp@Matthew:16:21 @{From that time began} (\apo tote rxato\). It was a suitable time for the disclosure of the greatest secret of his death. It is now just a little over six months before the cross. They must know it now to be ready then. The great confession of Peter made this seem an appropriate time. He will repeat the warnings (17:22f.| with mention of betrayal; strkjv@20:17-19| with the cross) which he now "began." Songs:the necessity (\dei\, must) of his suffering death at the hands of the Jerusalem ecclesiastics who have dogged his steps in Galilee is now plainly stated. Jesus added his resurrection "on the third day" (\ti triti hmeri\), not "on the fourth day," please observe. Dimly the shocked disciples grasped something of what Jesus said.
rwp@Matthew:17:27 @{Lest we cause them to stumble} (\hina m skandalismen autous\). He does not wish to create the impression that he and the disciples despise the temple and its worship. Aorist tense (punctiliar single act) here, though some MSS. have present subjunctive (linear). "A hook" (\agkistron\). The only example in the N.T. of fishing with a hook. From an unused verb \agkiz\, to angle, and that from \agkos\, a curve (so also \agkal\ the inner curve of the arm, strkjv@Luke:2:38|). {First cometh up} (\ton anabanta prton ichthun\). More correctly, "the first fish that cometh up." {A shekel} (\statra\). Greek stater = four drachmae, enough for two persons to pay the tax. {For me and thee} (\anti emou kai sou\). Common use of \anti\ in commercial transactions, "in exchange for." Here we have a miracle of foreknowledge. Such instances have happened. Some try to get rid of the miracle by calling it a proverb or by saying that Jesus only meant for Peter to sell the fish and thus get the money, a species of nervous anxiety to relieve Christ and the Gospel of Matthew from the miraculous. "All the attempts have been in vain which were made by the older Rationalism to put a non-miraculous meaning into these words" (B. Weiss). It is not stated that Peter actually caught such a fish though that is the natural implication. Why provision is thus only made for Peter along with Jesus we do not know.
rwp@Matthew:24:36 @{Not even the Son} (\oude ho huios\). Probably genuine, though absent in some ancient MSS. The idea is really involved in the words "but the Father only" (\ei m ho patr monos\). It is equally clear that in this verse Jesus has in mind the time of his second coming. He had plainly stated in verse 34| that those events (destruction of Jerusalem) would take place in that generation. He now as pointedly states that no one but the Father knows the day or the hour when these things (the second coming and the end of the world) will come to pass. One may, of course, accuse Jesus of hopeless confusion or extend his confession of ignorance of the date of the second coming to the whole chain of events. Songs:McNeile: "It is impossible to escape the conclusion that Jesus as Man, expected the End, within the lifetime of his contemporaries." And that after his explicit denial that he knew anything of the kind! It is just as easy to attribute ignorance to modern scholars with their various theories as to Jesus who admits his ignorance of the date, but not of the character of the coming.
rwp@Matthew:26:29 @{When I drink it new with you} (\hotan auto pin meth' humn kaimon\). This language rather implies that Jesus himself partook of the bread and the wine, though it is not distinctly stated. In the Messianic banquet it is not necessary to suppose that Jesus means the language literally, "the fruit of the vine." Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 109f.) gives an instance of \genma\ used of the vine in a papyrus 230 B.C. The language here employed does not make it obligatory to employ wine rather than pure grape juice if one wishes the other.
rwp@Revelation:11:6 @{To shut the heaven} (\kleisai ton ouranon\). First aorist active infinitive of \klei\. As Elijah did by prayer (1Kings:17:1; strkjv@Luke:4:25; strkjv@James:5:17|). {That it rain not} (\hina m huetos brechi\). Sub-final use of \hina m\ with the present active subjunctive of \brech\, old verb to rain (Matthew:5:45|), here with \huetos\ as subject. {During the days} (\tas hmeras\). Accusative of extent of time. In strkjv@Luke:4:25; strkjv@James:5:17| the period of the drouth in Elijah's time was three and a half years, just the period here. {Of their prophecy} (\ts prophteias autn\). Not here the gift of prophecy (1Corinthians:12:10|) or a particular prophecy or collection of prophecies (Revelation:1:3; strkjv@22:7f.|), but "the execution of the prophetic office" (Swete). {Over the waters} (\epi tn hudatn\). "Upon the waters." As Moses had (Exodus:7:20|). {Into blood} (\eis haima\). As already stated in strkjv@8:8| about the third trumpet and now again here. {To smite} (\pataxai\). First aorist active infinitive of \patass\, used here with \exousian echousin\ (they have power), as is \strephein\ (to turn). {With every plague} (\en pasi plgi\). In strkjv@1Kings:4:8|, but with reference to the plagues in Egypt. {As often as they shall desire} (\hosakis ean thelssin\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hosakis\ and modal \ean\ (= \an\) and the first aorist active subjunctive of \thel\, "as often as they will."
rwp@Revelation:17:16 @{These shall hate the harlot} (\houtoi missousin tn pornn\). Future active of \mise\. \Houtoi\ is resumptive demonstrative pronoun (masculine) referring to the ten horns and the beast (neuter); construction according to sense. The downfall of Rome will come from the sudden change in subject peoples. {Shall make her desolate and naked} (\rmmenn poisousin autn kai gumnn\). Future active of \poie\ and perfect passive predicate accusative participle of \ermo\, old verb (from \ermos\ desolate), again in strkjv@18:16,19|. \Gumnn\ (naked) is predicate adjective. {Shall eat her flesh} (\tas sarkas auts phagontai\). Future middle of the defective verb \esthi\, to eat. Note plural \sarkas\, portions of flesh (James:5:3|) as in strkjv@Psalms:27:2; strkjv@Micah:3:3|. {Shall burn her utterly with fire} (\autn katakausousin en puri\). Future active of \katakai\, to burn down (perfective use of \kai\). John wrote before the days of Alaric, Genseric, Ricimer, Totila, with their hordes which devastated Rome and the west in the fifth and sixth centuries. "No reader of the _Decline and Fall_ can be at a loss for materials which will at once illustrate and justify the general trend of St. John's prophecy" (Swete).
rwp@Revelation:22:10 @{And he saith unto me} (\kai legei moi\). The angel resumes as in strkjv@19:9|. {Seal not up} (\m sphragisis\). Prohibition with \m\ and the ingressive first aorist active subjunctive of \sphragiz\. Charles takes this to be the command of Christ because in verses 7,18| "the words of the prophecy of this book" come from Christ. But that is not a conclusive argument, though Charles, as already stated, rearranges these chapters to suit his own notion. Once only (10:4|) was John directed to seal and not to write. See there for discussion of \sphragiz\. This book is to be left open for all to read (1:3; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@17:9; strkjv@22:7,18|). {At hand} (\eggus\). As in strkjv@1:3|.
rwp@Romans:1:3 @{Concerning his Son} (\peri tou huiou autou\). Just as Jesus found himself in the O.T. (Luke:24:27,46|). The deity of Christ here stated. {According to the flesh} (\kata sarka\). His real humanity alongside of his real deity. For the descent from David see strkjv@Matthew:1:1,6,20; strkjv@Luke:1:27; strkjv@John:7:42; strkjv@Acts:13:23|, etc.
rwp@Romans:2:5 @{After thy hardness} (\kata tn sklrotta sou\). "According to thy hardness (old word from \sklros\, hard, stiff, only here in N.T.) will God's judgment be." {And impenitent heart} (\kai ametanoton kardian\). See \metanoian\ just before. "Thy unreconstructed heart," "with no change in the attitude of thy heart." {Treasurest up for thyself} (\thsaurizeis seauti\). See for \thsauriz\ on strkjv@Matthew:6:19f.; strkjv@Luke:12:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:14|. Dative case \seauti\ (for thyself) with a touch of irony (Vincent). {Wrath} (\orgn\). For such a Jew as already stated for the Gentile (1:18|). There is a revelation (\apokalupses\) of God's wrath for both in the day of wrath and righteous judgment (\dikaiokrisias\, a late compound word, in LXX, two examples in the Oxyrhynchus papyri, only here in N.T.). See strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:5| for \dikaias krises\. Paul looks to the judgment day as certain (cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10-12|), the day of the Lord (2Corinthians:1:14|).
rwp@Romans:4:11 @{The sign of circumcision} (\smeion peritoms\). It is the genitive of apposition, circumcision being the sign. {A seal of the righteousness of the faith} (\sphragida ts dikaiosuns ts pistes\). \Sphragis\ is old word for the seal placed on books (Revelation:5:1|), for a signet-ring (Revelation:7:2|), the stamp made by the seal (2Timothy:2:19|), that by which anything is confirmed (1Corinthians:9:2|) as here. The circumcision did not convey the righteousness, but only gave outward confirmation. It came by faith and "the faith which he had while in uncircumcision" (\ts en ti akrobustii\), "the in the state of uncircumcision faith." Whatever parallel exists between baptism and circumcision as here stated by Paul argues for faith before baptism and for baptism as the sign and seal of the faith already had before baptism. {That he might be} (\eis to einai auton\). This idiom may be God's purpose (contemplated result) as in \eis to logisthnai\ below, or even actual result (so that he was) as in strkjv@1:20|. {Though they be in uncircumcision} (\di' akrobustias\). Simply, "of those who believe while in the condition of uncircumcision."
rwp@Romans:9:25 @{In Hosea} (\en ti Hse\). He quotes strkjv@2:23| with some freedom. Hosea refers to the ten tribes and Paul applies the principle stated there to the Gentiles. Hosea had a son named _Lo-ammi_ = \ou laos\. Songs:here \ho ou laos mou\ "the not people of mine." \Ou\ with substantives obliterates the meaning of the substantive, an idiom seen in Thucydides and other Greek writers. See also strkjv@Romans:10:19; strkjv@1Peter:2:10|. {Which was not beloved} (\tn ouk gapmenn\). The LXX rendering of _Lo-ruhamah_ (not mercy, without mercy or love), name of Hosea's daughter. The use of \ouk\ with the perfect passive participle is emphatic, since \m\ is the usual negative of the participle in the _Koin_.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}