OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp difficult:
rwp@
2Thessalonians:2:16 @{And God our Father} (\kai [ho] theos ho patr hmn\). It is uncertain whether the first article \ho\ is genuine as it is absent in B D. Usually Paul has the Father before Christ except here, strkjv@2Corinthians:13:13; strkjv@Galatians:1:1|. {Which loved us} (\ho agapsas hmas\). This singular articular participle refers to \ho patr\, "though it is difficult to see how St. Paul could otherwise have expressed his thought, if he had intended to refer to the Son, as well as to the Father. There is probably no instance in St. Paul of a plural adjective or verb, when the two Persons of the Godhead are mentioned" (Lightfoot). {Eternal comfort} (\paraklsin ainian\). Distinct feminine form of \ainios\ here instead of masculine as in strkjv@Matthew:25:46|.
rwp@2Thessalonians:3:15 @{Not as an enemy} (\m hs echthron\). This is always the problem in such ostracism as discipline, however necessary it is at times. Few things in our churches are more difficult of wise execution than the discipline of erring members. The word \echthros\ is an adjective, hateful, from \echthos\, hate. It can be passive, {hated}, as in strkjv@Romans:11:28|, but is usually active {hostile}, enemy, foe.
rwp@2Timothy:2:26 @{They may recover themselves} (\ananpssin\). First aorist active subjunctive of \ananph\, late and rare word, to be sober again, only here in N.T., though \nph\ is in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:6|. {Out of the snare of the devil} (\ek ts tou diabolou pagidos\). They have been caught while mentally intoxicated in the devil's snare (1Timothy:3:7|). See strkjv@Romans:11:9| for \pagis\. {Taken captive} (\ezgrmenoi\). Perfect passive participle of \zgre\, old verb, to take alive (\zos, agre\), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:5:10| (of Peter). "Taken captive alive." {By him unto his will} (\hup' autou eis to ekeinou thelma\). This difficult phrase is understood variously. One way is to take both \autou\ and \ekeinou\, to refer to the devil. Another way is to take both of them to refer to God. Another way is to take \autou\ of the devil and \ekeinou\, of God. This is probably best, "taken captive by the devil" "that they may come back to soberness to do the will of God." There are difficulties in either view.
rwp@2Timothy:4:2 @{Preach the word} (\kruxon ton logon\). First aorist active imperative of \kruss\. For "the word" used absolutely, see strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:6; strkjv@Galatians:6:6|. {Be instant in season, out of season} (\epistthi eukairs akairs\). Second aorist (ingressive) active imperative of \ephistmi\ (intransitive use), "take a stand," "stand upon it or up to it," "carry on," "stick to it." The Vulgate has "_insta_." The two adverbs are like a proverb or a play (pun) on the word \kairos\. There are all sorts of seasons (\kairoi\), some difficult (\chalepoi\, strkjv@3:1|), some easy (\eukairi\, strkjv@1Corinthians:16:12|). {Reprove} (\elegxon\). First aorist active imperative of \elegch\. "Bring to proof." strkjv@Ephesians:5:11|. {Rebuke} (\epitimson\). First aorist active imperative of \epitima\, to give honour (or blame) to, to chide. Common in the Gospels (Luke:17:3|). {Exhort} (\parakaleson\). First aorist active imperative of \parakale\, common Pauline word.
rwp@Acts:1:5 @{Baptized with water} (\ebaptisen hudati\) {and with the Holy Ghost} (\en pneumati baptisthsesthe hagii\). The margin has "in the Holy Ghost" (Spirit, it should be). The American Standard Version renders "in" both with "water" and "Holy Spirit" as do Goodspeed (American Translation) and Mrs. Montgomery (Centenary Translation). John's own words (Matthew:3:11|) to which Jesus apparently refers use \en\ (in) both with water and Spirit. There is a so-called instrumental use of \en\ where we in English have to say "with" (Revelation:13:10| \en machairi\, like \machairi\, strkjv@Acts:12:2|). That is to say \en\ with the locative presents the act as located in a certain instrument like a sword (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 589f.). But the instrumental case is more common without \en\ (the locative and instrumental cases having the same form). Songs:it is often a matter of indifference which idiom is used as in strkjv@John:21:8| we have \ti ploiarii\ (locative without \en\). They came {in} (locative case without \en\) the boat. Songs:in strkjv@John:1:31| \en hudati baptizn\ baptizing in water. No distinction therefore can be insisted on here between the construction \hudati\ and \en pneumati\ (both being in the locative case, one without, one with \en\). Note unusual position of the verb \baptisthsesthe\ (future passive indicative) between \pneumati\ and \hagii\. This baptism of the Holy Spirit was predicted by John (Matthew:3:11|) as the characteristic of the Messiah's work. Now the Messiah himself in his last message before his Ascension proclaims that in a few days the fulfilment of that prophecy will come to pass. The Codex Bezae adds here "which ye are about to receive" and "until the Pentecost" to verse 5|. {Not many days hence} (\ou meta pollas tautas hmeras\). A neat Greek idiom difficult to render smoothly into English: "Not after many days these." The litotes (not many=few) is common in Luke (Luke:7:6; strkjv@15:13; strkjv@Acts:17:27; strkjv@19:11; strkjv@20:12; strkjv@21:39; strkjv@28:14; strkjv@28:2|). The predicate use of \tautas\ (without article) is to be noted. "These" really means as a starting point, "from these" (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 702). It was ten days hence. This idiom occurs several times in Luke (Luke:24:21; strkjv@Acts:24:21|), as elsewhere (John:4:18; strkjv@2Peter:3:1|). In strkjv@Luke:2:12| the copula is easily supplied as it exists in strkjv@Luke:1:36; strkjv@2:2|.
rwp@Acts:5:34 @{Gamaliel} (\Gamalil\). The grandson of Hillel, teacher of Paul (Acts:22:3|), later president of the Sanhedrin, and the first of the seven rabbis termed "Rabban." It is held by some that he was one of the doctors who heard the Boy Jesus in the temple (Luke:2:47|) and that he was a secret disciple like Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, but there is no evidence of either position. Besides, he appears here as a loyal Pharisee and "a doctor of the law" (\nomodidaskalos\). This word appears already in strkjv@Luke:5:17| of the Pharisaic doctors bent on criticizing Jesus, which see. Paul uses it of Judaizing Christians (1Timothy:1:7|). Like other great rabbis he had a great saying: "Procure thyself a teacher, avoid being in doubt; and do not accustom thyself to give tithes by guess." He was a man of judicial temper and not prone to go off at a tangent, though his brilliant young pupil Saul went to the limit about Stephen without any restraint on the part of Gamaliel so far as the record goes. Gamaliel champions the cause of the apostles as a Pharisee to score a point against the Sadducees. He acts as a theological opportunist, not as a disciple of Christ. He felt that a temporizing policy was best. There are difficulties in this speech of Gamaliel and it is not clear how Luke obtained the data for the address. It is, of course, possible that Saul was present and made notes of it for Luke afterwards. {Had in honour of all the people} (\timios panti ti lai\). Ethical dative. \Timios\ from \tim\, old word meaning precious, dear. {The men} (\tous anthrpous\). Correct text as in verse 35|, not "the apostles" as Textus Receptus.
rwp@Acts:9:40 @{Put them all forth} (\ekbaln ex pantas\). Second aorist (effective) active participle of \ekball\, a rather strong word, perhaps with some difficulty. Cf. strkjv@Mark:5:40| which incident Peter may have recalled. The words are not genuine in strkjv@Luke:8:54|. Peter's praying alone reminds one of Elijah (1Kings:17:20|) and the widow's son and Elisha for the Shunammite's son (2Kings:4:33|). {Tabitha, arise} (\Tabeitha, anastthi\). With sublime faith like \Taleitha koum\ of Jesus in strkjv@Mark:5:41|. {She sat up} (\anekathisen\). Effective aorist active indicative of \anakathiz\. Often in medical writers, only here in the N.T. and strkjv@Luke:7:15| where Westcott and Hort have in the margin the uncompounded form \ekathisen\. Vivid picture.
rwp@Acts:10:25 @{That Peter entered} (\tou eiselthein ton Petron\). This is a difficult construction, for the subject of \egeneto\ (it happened) has to be the articular genitive infinitive \tou eiselthein\ with the accusative of general reference \ton Petron\. Most commentators consider it inexplicable. It is probably an extension of the ordinary articular infinitive under the influence of the Hebrew infinitive construct without regard to the case, regarding it as a fixed case form and so using it as nominative. Precisely this construction of \tou\ and the infinitive as the subject of a verb occurs in the LXX (2Chronicles:6:7|, etc.). See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1067f. for full discussion of this obvious Hebraism. Somewhat similar examples appear in strkjv@Acts:20:3; strkjv@27:1|. But the Codex Bezae avoids this awkward idiom by the genitive absolute (\proseggizontos tou Petrou\) and some additional details (one of the servants ran forward and announced that he was come). {Worshipped him} (\prosekunsen\). "Cornelius was not an idolator and would not have honoured Peter as a god" (Furneaux). The word probably means here reverence like old English usage (Wycliff) and not actual worship, though Peter took it that way (verse 26|). Jesus accepted such worship (Matthew:8:2; strkjv@Luke:5:8| by Peter).
rwp@Acts:10:34 @{Opened his mouth} (\anoixas to stoma\). Solemn formula for beginning his address (8:35; strkjv@18:14; strkjv@Matthew:5:2; strkjv@13:35|). But also good elocution for the speaker. {I perceive} (\katalambanomai\). Aoristic present middle of \katalamban\, to take hold of, the middle noting mental action, to lay hold with the mind (Acts:4:13; strkjv@10:34; strkjv@25:25; strkjv@Ephesians:3:18|). It had been a difficult thing for Peter to grasp, but now "of a truth" (\ep' altheias\) the light has cleared away the fogs. It was not until Peter had crossed the threshold of the house of Cornelius in the new environment and standpoint that he sees this new and great truth. {Respecter of persons} (\prospolmpts\). This compound occurs only here and in Chrysostom. It is composed of \prospon\ face or person (\pros\ and \ops\, before the eye or face) and \lamban\. The abstract form \prospolmpsia\ occurs in strkjv@James:2:1| (also strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9; strkjv@Colossians:3:25|) and the verb \prospolempte\ in strkjv@James:2:9|. The separate phrase (\lambanein prospon\) occurs in strkjv@Luke:20:21; strkjv@Galatians:2:6|. The phrase was already in the LXX (Deuteronomy:10:17; strkjv@2Chronicles:19:7; strkjv@Psalms:82:6|). Luke has simply combined the two words into one compound one. The idea is to pay regard to one's looks or circumstances rather than to his intrinsic character. The Jews had come to feel that they were the favourites of God and actually sons of the kingdom of heaven because they were descendants of Abraham. John the Baptist rebuked them for this fallacy.
rwp@Acts:10:41 @{Chosen before} (\prokecheirotonmenois\). Perfect passive participle dative plural from \procheirotone\, to choose or designate by hand (\cheirotone, cheir\, hand, and \tein\, to stretch, as in strkjv@Acts:14:23; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:19|), beforehand (\pro\), a double compound as old as Plato, but here alone in the N.T. Peter is evidently stating the thing as it happened and not trying to make a convincing story by saying that both friends and foes saw him after his resurrection. It is the "historian's candour" (Paley) in Luke here that adds to the credibility of the narrative. The sceptical Jews would not have believed and Jesus was kept from open contact with the world of sin after his Passion. {To us who did eat and drink with him} (\hmin hoitines sunephagomen kai sunepiomen auti\). The "who" (\hoitines\) is first person agreeing with "us" (\hmin\). Second aorist active indicative of the common verbs \sunesthi\ and \sumpin\. \Auti\ is associative instrumental case. There are difficulties to us in understanding how Jesus could eat and drink after the resurrection as told here and in strkjv@Luke:24:41-3|, but at any rate Peter makes it clear that it was no hallucination or ghost, but Jesus himself whom they saw after he rose from the dead, "after the rising as to him" (\meta to anastnai auton\, \meta\ with the accusative articular infinitive second aorist active and the accusative \auton\ of general reference). Furneaux dares to think that the disciples misunderstood Jesus about eating after the resurrection. But that is to deny the testimony merely because we cannot explain the transition state of the body of Jesus.
rwp@Acts:11:4 @{Began} (\arxamenos\). Not pleonastic here, but graphically showing how Peter began at the beginning and gave the full story of God's dealings with him in Joppa and Caesarea. {Expounded} (\exetitheto\). Imperfect middle of \ektithmi\, to set forth, old verb, but in the N.T. only in Acts (7:21; strkjv@11:4; strkjv@18:26; strkjv@28:23|), a deliberate and detailed narrative "in order" (\kathexs\). Old word for in succession. In the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:1:2; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Acts:3:24; strkjv@11:14; strkjv@18:23|. Luke evidently considered this defence of Peter important and he preserves the marks of authenticity. It came originally from Peter himself (verses 5,6,15,16|). "The case of Cornelius was a test case of primary importance" (Page), "the first great difficulty of the early Church." Part of the story Luke gives three times (10:3-6,30-32; strkjv@11:13f.|). See the discussion chapter 10 for details given here.
rwp@Acts:11:23 @{The grace of God, was glad} (\tn charin tn tou theou echar\). Note repetition of the article, "the grace that of God." The verb (second aorist passive indicative of \chair\) has the same root as \charis\. See the same _suavis paronomasia_ in strkjv@Luke:1:28|. "Grace brings gladness" (Page). "A smaller man would have raised difficulties as to circumcision or baptism" (Furneaux). {He exhorted} (\parekalei\). Imperfect active, picturing the continuous encouragement from Barnabas. {With purpose of heart} (\ti prothesei ts kardias\). Placing before (from \pro-tithmi\), old word for set plan as in strkjv@Acts:27:13; strkjv@Romans:8:28|. The glow of the first enthusiasm might pass as often happens after a revival. Barnabas had a special gift (4:36|) for work like this. {Cleave unto the Lord} (\prosmenein [en] ti kurii\). Dative case (locative if \en\ is genuine) of \kurios\ (here Jesus again) after \prosemenein\ to keep on remaining loyal to (present active infinitive). Persistence was needed in such a pagan city.
rwp@Acts:12:10 @{When they were past} (\dielthontes\). Second aorist active participle of \dierchomai\, transitive with \dia\ in composition. {The first and the second ward} (\prtn phulakn kai deuteran\). It is not clear to what this language refers. Some take it to mean single soldiers, using \phulakn\ in the sense of a guard (one before the door, one at the iron gate). But it seems hardly likely that the two soldiers with whom Peter had been stationed are meant. Probably the "first ward" means the two soldiers of the quaternion stationed by the door and the second ward some other soldiers, not part of the sixteen, further on in the prison by the iron gate. However understood, the difficulties of escape are made plain. {Unto the iron gate that leadeth into the city} (\epi tn puln tn sidrn tn pherousan eis tn polin\). Note the triple use of the article (the gate the iron one the one leading into the city). For this resumptive use of the article see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 762, 764. This iron gate may have opened from a court out into the street and effectually barred escape. {Opened to them} (\noig autois\). Second aorist passive indicative of \anoig\, the usual later form though \noichth\ (first aorist passive) occurs also, was opened. {Of its own accord} (\automat\). Old compound adjective (\autos\, self, obsolete \ma\, to desire eagerly, feminine form though masculine \automatos\ also used as feminine). In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:4:28|. It was a strange experience for Peter. The Codex Bezae adds here "went down the seven steps" (\katebsan tous hepta bathmous\), an interesting detail that adds to the picture. {One street} (\rhumn mian\). The angel saw Peter through one of the narrow streets and then left him. We have no means of knowing precisely the location of the prison in the city. On "departed" (\apest\) see on verse ¯7|.
rwp@Acts:13:19 @{When he had destroyed} (\katheln\). Second aorist active participle of \kathaire\, to tear down, old verb. {He gave them for an inheritance} (\kateklronomsen\). First aorist active indicative of the double compound verb \kata-klro-nome\, late verb in LXX (Numbers:34:18; strkjv@Deuteronomy:3:28; strkjv@Joshua:14:1|) and only here in the N.T., to distribute by lot, to distribute as an inheritance. This is the correct reading and not \kateklrodotsen\ from \kataklrodote\ of the Textus Receptus. These two verbs were confused in the MSS. of the LXX as well as here. {For about four hundred and fifty years} (\hs etesin tetrakosiois kai pentkonta\). Associative instrumental case with an expression of time as in strkjv@8:11; strkjv@Luke:8:29| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 527). The oldest MSS. (Aleph A B C Vg Sah Boh) place these figures before "after these things" and so in verse 19|. This is the true reading and is in agreement with the notation in strkjv@1Kings:6:1|. The difficulty found in the Textus Receptus (King James Version) thus disappears with the true text. The four hundred and fifty years runs therefore from the birth of Isaac to the actual conquest of Canaan and does not cover the period of the Judges. See on ¯Acts:7:6|.
rwp@Acts:14:8 @{At Lystra} (\en Lustrois\). Neuter plural as in strkjv@16:2; strkjv@2Timothy:3:11| while feminine singular in strkjv@14:6,21; strkjv@16:1|. There was apparently no synagogue in Lystra and so not many Jews. Paul and Barnabas had to do open-air preaching and probably had difficulty in being understood by the natives though both Greek and Latin inscriptions were discovered here by Professor Sterrett in 1885. The incident narrated here (verses 8-18|) shows how they got a real hearing among these rude heathen. {There sat} (\ekathto\). Imperfect middle of \kathmai\. Was sitting. This case is very much like that in strkjv@3:1-11|, healed by Peter. Possibly outside the gate (verse 13|) or some public place. {Impotent in his feet} (\adunatos tois posin\). Old verbal, but only here in the N.T. in this sense except figuratively in strkjv@Romans:15:1|. Elsewhere it means "impossible" (Matthew:19:26|). Locative case. Common in medical writers in the sense of "impotent." Songs:Tobit strkjv@2:10; strkjv@5:9. {Had walked} (\periepatsen\). Songs:best MSS., first aorist active indicative "walked," not \periepepatkei\, "had walked" (past perfect active).
rwp@Acts:14:21 @{When they had preached the gospel to that city} (\euaggelisamenoi tn polin ekeinn\). Having evangelized (first aorist middle participle) that city, a smaller city and apparently with no trouble from the Jews. {Had made many disciples} (\mathteusantes hikanous\). First aorist active participle of \mathteu\ from \mathts\, a learner or disciple. Late verb in Plutarch, to be a disciple (Matthew:27:57| like strkjv@John:19:38|) and then to disciple (old English, Spenser), to make a disciple as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| and here. Paul and Barnabas were literally here obeying the command of Jesus in discipling people in this heathen city. {They returned to Lystra and to Iconium, and to Antioch} (\hupestrepsan eis tn Lustran kai eis Ikonion kai eis Antiocheian\). Derbe was the frontier city of the Roman empire. The quickest way to return to Antioch in Syria would have been by the Cilician Gates or by the pass over Mt. Taurus by which Paul and Silas will come to Derbe in the second tour (Acts:15:41-16:1|), but difficult to travel in winter. But it was necessary to revisit the churches in Lystra, Iconium, Antioch in Pisidia and to see that they were able to withstand persecution. Paul was a Roman citizen though he had not made use of this privilege as yet for his own protection. Against mob violence it would count for little, but he did not hesitate. Paul had been stoned in Lystra, threatened in Iconium, expelled in Antioch. He shows his wisdom in conserving his work.
rwp@Acts:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo ts Ioudaias\). Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (11:2|) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (13:13|) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18|) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord's doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Acts:15:24|). In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty." It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts strkjv@15:5-29| in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in strkjv@11:29f|. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in strkjv@11:29f.|, but only "the elders." In strkjv@Acts:15| Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In strkjv@Galatians:2:2| by the use of "them" (\autois\) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses strkjv@15:5-6|. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18|), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew:15:24ff.|). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. Songs:one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest. {Taught the brethren} (\edidaskon tous adelphous\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (11:20-26|), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis. {Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved} (\ean me peritmthte ti ethei Muses, ou dunasthe sthnai\). There was the dictum of the Judaizers to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had been circumcised. This is probably the precise language employed, for they spoke in Greek to these Greeks. It is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, \ean\ plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peritemn\). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (\ti ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\sthnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.
rwp@Acts:15:21 @{For Moses} (\Muss gar\). A reason why these four necessary things (verse 28|) are named. In every city are synagogues where rabbis proclaim (\krussontas\) these matters. Hence the Gentile Christians would be giving constant offence to neglect them. The only point where modern Christian sentiment would object would be about "things strangled" and "blood" in the sense of any blood left in the animals, though most Christians probably agree with the feeling of James in objecting to blood in the food. If "blood" is taken to be "murder," that difficulty vanishes. Moses will suffer no loss for these Gentile Christians are not adherents of Judaism.
rwp@Acts:17:16 @{Now while Paul waited for them in Athens} (\En de tais Athnais ekdechomenou autous tou Paulou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \ekdechomai\, old verb to receive, but only with the sense of looking out for, expecting found here and elsewhere in N.T We know that Timothy did come to Paul in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1,6|) from Thessalonica and was sent back to them from Athens. If Silas also came to Athens, he was also sent away, possibly to Philippi, for that church was deeply interested in Paul. At any rate both Timothy and Silas came from Macedonia to Corinth with messages and relief for Paul (Acts:18:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:8f.|). Before they came and after they left, Paul felt lonely in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1|), the first time on this tour or the first that he has been completely without fellow workers. Athens had been captured by Sulla B.C. 86. After various changes Achaia, of which Corinth is the capital, is a separate province from Macedonia and A.D. 44 was restored by Claudius to the Senate with the Proconsul at Corinth. Paul is probably here about A.D. 50. Politically Athens is no longer of importance when Paul comes though it is still the university seat of the world with all its rich environment and traditions. Rackham grows eloquent over Paul the Jew of Tarsus being in the city of Pericles and Demosthenes, Socrates and Plato and Aristotle, Sophocles and Euripides. In its Agora Socrates had taught, here was the Academy of Plato, the Lyceum of Aristotle, the Porch of Zeno, the Garden of Epicurus. Here men still talked about philosophy, poetry, politics, religion, anything and everything. It was the art centre of the world. The Parthenon, the most beautiful of temples, crowned the Acropolis. Was Paul insensible to all this cultural environment? It is hard to think so for he was a university man of Tarsus and he makes a number of allusions to Greek writers. Probably it had not been in Paul's original plan to evangelize Athens, difficult as all university seats are, but he cannot be idle though here apparently by chance because driven out of Macedonia. {Was provoked} (\parxuneto\). Imperfect passive of \paroxun\, old verb to sharpen, to stimulate, to irritate (from \para, oxus\), from \paroxusmos\ (Acts:15:39|), common in old Greek, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:13:5|. It was a continual challenge to Paul's spirit when he beheld (\therountos\, genitive of present participle agreeing with \autou\ (his), though late MSS. have locative \therounti\ agreeing with \en auti\). {The city full of idols} (\kateidlon ousan tn polin\). Note the participle \ousan\ not preserved in the English (either the city being full of idols or that the city was full of idols, sort of indirect discourse). Paul, like any stranger was looking at the sights as he walked around. This adjective \kateidlon\ (perfective use of \kata\ and \eidlon\ is found nowhere else, but it is formed after the analogy of \katampelos, katadendron\), full of idols. Xenophon (_de Republ. Ath_.) calls the city \hol bomos, hol thuma theois kai anathma\ (all altar, all sacrifice and offering to the gods). These statues were beautiful, but Paul was not deceived by the mere art for art's sake. The idolatry and sensualism of it all glared at him (Romans:1:18-32|). Renan ridicules Paul's ignorance in taking these statues for idols, but Paul knew paganism better than Renan. The superstition of this centre of Greek culture was depressing to Paul. One has only to recall how superstitious cults today flourish in the atmosphere of Boston and Los Angeles to understand conditions in Athens. Pausanias says that Athens had more images than all the rest of Greece put together. Pliny states that in the time of Nero Athens had over 30,000 public statues besides countless private ones in the homes. Petronius sneers that it was easier to find a god than a man in Athens. Every gateway or porch had its protecting god. They lined the street from the Piraeus and caught the eye at every place of prominence on wall or in the agora.
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:17:26 @{And he made of one} (\epoisen te ex henos\). The word \haimatos\ (blood) is absent from Aleph A B and is a later explanatory addition. What Paul affirms is the unity of the human race with a common origin and with God as the Creator. This view runs counter to Greek exclusiveness which treated other races as barbarians and to Jewish pride which treated other nations as heathen or pagan (the Jews were \laos\, the Gentiles \ethn\). The cosmopolitanism of Paul here rises above Jew and Greek and claims the one God as the Creator of the one race of men. The Athenians themselves claimed to be \antochthonous\ (indigenous) and a special creation. Zeno and Seneca did teach a kind of cosmopolitanism (really pantheism) far different from the personal God of Paul. It was Rome, not Greece, that carried out the moral ideas of Zeno. Man is part of the universe (verse 24|) and God created (\epoisen\) man as he created (\poisas\) the all. {For to dwell} (\katoikein\). Infinitive (present active) of purpose, so as to dwell. {Having determined} (\horisas\). First aorist active participle of \horiz\, old verb to make a horizon as already in strkjv@19:42| which see. Paul here touches God's Providence. God has revealed himself in history as in creation. His hand appears in the history of all men as well as in that of the Chosen People of Israel. {Appointed seasons} (\prostetagmenous kairous\). Not the weather as in strkjv@14:17|, but "the times of the Gentiles" (\kairoi ethnn\) of which Jesus spoke (Luke:21:24|). The perfect passive participle of \prostass\, old verb to enjoin, emphasizes God's control of human history without any denial of human free agency as was involved in the Stoic Fate (\Heirmarmen\). {Bounds} (\horothesias\). Limits? Same idea in strkjv@Job:12:23|. Nations rise and fall, but it is not blind chance or hard fate. Thus there is an interplay between God's will and man's activities, difficult as it is for us to see with our shortened vision.
rwp@Hebrews:11:19 @{Accounting} (\logisamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \logizomai\. Abraham had God's clear command that contravened God's previous promise. This was his solution of his difficult situation. {God is able} (\dunatai ho theos\). God had given him Isaac in his old age. God can raise him from the dead. It was Abraham's duty to obey God. {In a parable} (\en paraboli\). See already strkjv@9:9| for \parabol\. Because of (\hothen\, whence) Abraham's superb faith Isaac was spared and so he received him back (\ekomisato\) as almost from the dead. This is the test that Abraham stood of which James speaks (James:2:23|).
rwp@Info_James @ THE PURPOSE If James is writing solely to non-Christian Jews, the purpose is to win them to Christ, and so he puts the gospel message in a way to get a hearing from the Jews. That is true, whether he has them in mind or not, though he does not do it by the suppression of the deity of Jesus Christ. In the very first verse he places him on a par with God as "the Lord Jesus Christ." In strkjv@James:2:1| he presents Jesus as the object of faith: "as you believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Glory" (Moffatt's Translation), where Jesus is termed the Shekinah Glory of God. It is true that there is no discussion in the Epistle of the cross and the resurrection of Jesus, but there is an allusion to the murder of Jesus in strkjv@James:5:6| and the second coming in strkjv@James:5:8|. The chief aim of the Epistle is to strengthen the faith and loyalty of the Jewish Christians in the face of persecution from rich and overbearing Jews who were defrauding and oppressing them. It is a picture of early Christian life in the midst of difficult social conditions between capital and labor which also exist today. Songs:then it is a very modern message even if it is the earliest New Testament book. The glory of the New Testament lies precisely at this point in that the revelation of God in Christ meets our problems today because it did meet those of the first century A.D. Christian principles stand out clearly for our present-day living.
rwp@Info_James @ RECENT BOOKS ON JAMES Baljon, J. M. S., _Comm. op de katholieke brieven_ (1904). Bardenhewer, O., _Der Brief des hl. Jakobus_ (1928). Bartmann, _St. Paulus und St. Jakobus_. Belser, J. E., _Epistel des hl. Jakobus_ (1909). Beyschlag, W., _Der Brief des Jakobus_. Meyer Komm. 6 Aufl. (1898). Brown, Charles, _The General Epistle of James_. 2nd ed. (1907). Camerlinck, _Commentarius in epistolas catholicas_ (1909). Carpenter, W. Boyd, _The Wisdom of James the Just_ (1903). Carr, Arthur, _The General Epistle of James_. Cambridge Greek Testament. New ed. (1905). Chaine, J., _L Epitre de S. Jacques_ (1927). Dale, R. W., _Discourses on the Epistle of James (1895). Deems, C. F., _The Gospel of Common Sense_. Dibelius, _M., Meyer's Comm. 7 Aufl. (1921). Feine, _Der Jakobusbrief_, etc. (1893). Fitch, _James the Lord's Brother_. Gaugusch, L., _Der Lehrgehalt der Jakobus-epistel_ (1914). Grafe, _Stellung und Bedeutung des Jakobusbriefes_ (1904). Grosheide, F. W., _Deuteronomy:brief aan de Hebreen en de brief des Jakobus_ (1927). Hauck, F., _Der Br. d. Jak. in Zahn's Komm_. (1926). Hollmann, G., _Die Schriften d. N.T_. 3 Aufl. (1917). Holtzmann, O., _Das N.T. II_ (1926). Hort, F. J. A., _The Epistle of James as far as strkjv@4:7_ (1909). Huther, J. E., _Meyer's Komm_. 3 Aufl. (1870). Johnstone, R., _Lectures Exegetical and Practical_. 2nd ed. (1889). Knowling, R. J., _Comm. on the Epistle of St. James_ (1904). Westminster Series. Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of St. James_. 3rd ed. (1910). Meinertz, _Der Jakobusbrief und sein Verfasser_ (1905). Meyer, A., _Das Ratsel des Jak_. (1930). Moffatt, James, _The General Epistles (James, Peter, and Judas_) (1928). Osterley, W. E., _The Epistle of St. James_. Expos. Gk. Test. (1910). Parry, J., _The General Epistle of James_ (1904). Patrick, W., _James, the Lord's Brother_ (1906). Plummer, A., _The General Epistle of St. James_. Expos. Bible (1891). Rendall, G. H., _The Epistle of St. James and Judaic Chris- tianity_ (1927). Robertson, A. T., _Studies in the Epistle of James_. 3rd ed. (1923). First in 1915 as _Pract. and Social Aspects of Christianity_. Ropes, J. H., _A Crit. and Exeget. Comm. on the Epistle of St. James_. Int. and Crit. Comm. (1916). Smith, H. M., _The Epistle of James_ (1925). Soden, H. Von, _Der Brief des Jakobus_. Hand-Comm. (1893). Spitta, F., _Der Brief des Jakobus untersucht_ (1896). Taylor, J. F., _The Apostle of Patience_ (1907). Weiss, B., _Die Katholische Briefe_ (1902). _Der Jakobusbrief und die neuere Kritik_ (1904). Windisch, H., _Die Katholische Briefe. Handbuch Zum N.T._, 2 Aufl. (1930). strkjv@James:1:1 @{James} (\Iakbos\). Grecised form (nominative absolute) of the Hebrew \Iakb\ (so LXX). Common name among the Jews, and this man in Josephus (_Ant_. XX.9.1) and three others of this name in Josephus also. {Servant} (\doulos\). Bond-servant or slave as Paul (Romans:1:1; strkjv@Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@Titus:1:1|). {Of the Lord Jesus Christ} (\kuriou Isou Christou\). Here on a par with God (\theou\) and calls himself not \adelphos\ (brother) of Jesus, but \doulos\. The three terms here as in strkjv@2:1| have their full significance: Jesus is the Messiah and Lord. James is not an Ebionite. He accepts the deity of Jesus his brother, difficult as it was for him to do so. The word \kurios\ is frequent in the LXX for _Elohim_ and _Jahweh_ as the Romans applied it to the emperor in their emperor worship. See strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| for \Kurios Isous\ and strkjv@Phillipians:2:11| for \Kurios Isous Christos\. {To the twelve tribes} (\tais ddeka phulais\). Dative case. The expression means "Israel in its fulness and completeness" (Hort), regarded as a unity (Acts:26:7|) with no conception of any "lost" tribes. {Which are of the Dispersion} (\tais en ti diaspori\). "Those in the Dispersion" (repeated article). The term appears in strkjv@Deuteronomy:28:25| (LXX) and comes from \diaspeir\, to scatter (sow) abroad. In its literal sense we have it in strkjv@John:7:34|, but here and in strkjv@1Peter:1:1| Christian Jews are chiefly, if not wholly, in view. The Jews at this period were roughly divided into Palestinian Jews (chiefly agriculturists) and Jews of the Dispersion (dwellers in cities and mainly traders). In Palestine Aramaic was spoken as a rule, while in the Western Diaspora the language was Greek (_Koin_, LXX), though the Eastern Diaspora spoke Aramaic and Syriac. The Jews of the Diaspora were compelled to compare their religion with the various cults around them (comparative religion) and had a wider outlook on life. James writes thus in cultural _Koin_ but in the Hebraic tone. {Greeting} (\chairein\). Absolute infinitive (present active of \chair\) as in strkjv@Acts:15:23| (the Epistle to Antioch and the churches of Syria and Galatia). It is the usual idiom in the thousands of papyri letters known to us, but in no other New Testament letter. But note \chairein legete\ in strkjv@2John:1:10,11|.
rwp@James:3:6 @{The tongue is a fire} (\h glssa pur\). Songs:necessarily since there is no article with \pur\ (apparently same word as German _feuer_, Latin _purus_, English _pure, fire_). This metaphor of fire is applied to the tongue in strkjv@Proverbs:16:27; strkjv@26:18-22|; Sirach strkjv@28:22. {The world of iniquity} (\ho kosmos ts adikias\). A difficult phrase, impossible to understand according to Ropes as it stands. If the comma is put after \pur\ instead of after \adikias\, then the phrase may be the predicate with \kathistatai\ (present passive indicative of \kathistmi\, "is constituted," or the present middle "presents itself"). Even so, \kosmos\ remains a difficulty, whether it means the "ornament" (1Peter:3:3|) or "evil world" (James:1:27|) or just "world" in the sense of widespread power for evil. The genitive \adikias\ is probably descriptive (or qualitative). Clearly James means to say that the tongue can play havoc in the members of the human body. {Which defileth the whole body} (\h spilousa holon to sma\). Present active participle of \spilo\ late _Koin_, verb, to stain from \spilos\ (spot, also late word, in N.T. only in strkjv@Ephesians:5:27; strkjv@2Peter:2:13|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Judges:1:23|. Cf. strkjv@1:27| \aspilon\ (unspotted). {Setteth on fire} (\phlogizousa\). Present active participle of \phlogiz\, old verb, to set on fire, to ignite, from \phlox\ (flame), in N.T. only in this verse. See \anaptei\ (verse 5|). {The wheel of nature} (\ton trochon geneses\). Old word for wheel (from \trech\, to run), only here in N.T. "One of the hardest passages in the Bible" (Hort). To what does \trochon\ refer? For \geneses\ see strkjv@1:23| apparently in the same sense. Vincent suggests "the wheel of birth" (cf. strkjv@Matthew:1:1,18|). The ancient writers often use this same phrase (or \kuklos\, cycle, in place of \trochos\), but either in a physiological or a philosophical sense. James may have caught the metaphor from the current use, but certainly he has no such Orphic or Pythagorean doctrine of the transmigration of souls, "the unending round of death and rebirth" (Ropes). The wheel of life may be considered either in motion or standing still, though setting on fire implies motion. There is no reference to the zodiac. {And is set on fire by hell} (\kai phlogizomen hupo gehenns\). Present passive participle of \phlogiz\, giving the continual source of the fire in the tongue. For the metaphor of fire with \gehenna\ see strkjv@Matthew:5:22|.
rwp@James:4:5 @{The Scripture} (\h graph\). Personification as in strkjv@Galatians:3:8; strkjv@James:2:23|. But no O.T. passage is precisely like this, though it is "a poetical rendering" (Ropes) of strkjv@Exodus:20:5|. The general thought occurs also in strkjv@Genesis:6:3-5; strkjv@Isaiah:63:8-16|, etc. Paul has the same idea also (Galatians:5:17,21; strkjv@Romans:8:6,8|). It is possible that the reference is really to the quotation in verse 6| from strkjv@Proverbs:3:34| and treating all before as a parenthesis. There is no way to decide positively. {In vain} (\kens\). Old adverb (Aristotle) from \kens\ (2:20|), here alone in N.T. "Emptily," not meaning what it says. {Made to dwell} (\katikisen\). First aorist active of \katoikiz\, old verb, to give a dwelling to, only here in N.T. {Long unto envying} (\pros phthonon epipothei\). A difficult phrase. Some even take \pros phthonon\ with \legei\ rather than with \epipothei\, as it naturally does go, meaning "jealously." But even so, with God presented as a jealous lover, does \to pneuma\ refer to the Holy Spirit as the subject of \epipothei\ or to man's spirit as the object of \epipothei\? Probably the former and \epipothei\ then means to yearn after in the good sense as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:8|.
rwp@John:5:4 @All of this verse is wanting in the oldest and best manuscripts like Aleph B C D W 33 Old Syriac, Coptic versions, Latin Vulgate. It is undoubtedly added, like the clause in verse 3|, to make clearer the statement in verse 7|. Tertullian is the earliest writer to mention it. The Jews explained the healing virtues of the intermittent spring by the ministry of angels. But the periodicity of such angelic visits makes it difficult to believe. It is a relief to many to know that the verse is spurious.
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:6:51 @{The living bread} (\ho artos ho zn\). "The bread the living." Repetition of the claim in 35,41,48|, but with a slight change from \zs\ to \zn\ (present active participle of \za\). It is alive and can give life. See strkjv@4:10| for living water. In strkjv@Revelation:1:17| Jesus calls himself the Living One (\ho zn\). {For ever} (\eis ton aina\). Eternally like \ainion\ with \zn\ in 47|. {I shall give} (\eg ds\). Emphasis on \eg\ (I). Superior so to Moses. {Is my flesh} (\h sarx mou estin\). See on ¯1:14| for \sarx\ the Incarnation. This new idea creates far more difficulty to the hearers who cannot grasp Christ's idea of self-sacrifice. {For the life of the world} (\huper ts tou kosmou zs\). Over, in behalf of, \huper\ means, and in some connexions instead of as in strkjv@11:50|. See strkjv@1:30| for the Baptist's picture of Christ as the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. See also strkjv@3:17; strkjv@4:42; strkjv@1John:3:16; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@Galatians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.; strkjv@Romans:5:8|. Jesus has here presented to this Galilean multitude the central fact of his atoning death for the spiritual life of the world.
rwp@John:6:57 @{The living Father} (\ho zn patr\). Nowhere else in the N.T., but see strkjv@5:26| and "the living God" (Matthew:16:16; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:16|). The Father is the source of life and so "I live because of the Father" (\kag z dia ton patera\). {He that eateth me} (\ho trgn me\). Still bolder putting of the mystical appropriation of Christ (51,53,54,56|). {Because of me} (\di' eme\). The same idea appears in strkjv@14:19|: "Because I live ye shall live also." See strkjv@11:25|. Jesus Christ is our ground of hope and guarantee of immortality. Life is in Christ. There is no real difficulty in this use of \dia\ with the accusative as with \dia ton patera\ just before. It occurs also in strkjv@15:3|. As the Father is the fount of life to Christ, so Christ is the fount of life to us. See strkjv@1John:4:9| where \dia\ is used with the genitive (\di' autou\) as the intermediate agent, not the ground or reason as here.
rwp@John:6:69 @{We have believed} (\hmeis pepisteukamen\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu\, "We have come to believe and still believe" (verse 29|). {And know} (\kai egnkamen\). Same tense of \ginsk\, "We have come to know and still know." {Thou art the Holy One of God} (\su ei ho hagios tou theou\). Bernard follows those who believe that this is John's report of the same confession given by the Synoptics (Mark:8:27f.; strkjv@Matthew:16:13-20; strkjv@Luke:9:18f.|), an utterly unjustifiable conclusion. The details are wholly different. Here in the synagogue in Capernaum, there on Mt. Hermon near Caesarea Philippi. What earthly difficulty is there in supposing that Peter could make a noble confession twice? That is to my mind a wooden conception of the apostles in their growing apprehension of Christ.
rwp@John:7:38 @{He that believeth on me} (\ho pisteun eis eme\). Nominative absolute as is not uncommon. {The scripture} (\h graph\). No precise passage can be quoted, though similar idea in several (Isaiah:55:1; strkjv@58:11; strkjv@Zechariah:13:1; strkjv@14:8; strkjv@Ezekiel:47:1; strkjv@Joel:3:18|). Chrysostom confines it to strkjv@Isaiah:28:16| by punctuation (only the nominative absolute as the Scripture). {Out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water} (\potamoi ek ts koilias autou reusousin hudatos zntos\). Some ancient Western writers connect \pinet\ of verse 37| with \ho pisteun\ in verse 38|. By this arrangement \autou\ (his) with \koilias\ is made to refer to Christ, not to the believer. Burney argues that \koilia\ is a mistranslation of the Aramaic (fountain, not belly) and that the reference is to strkjv@Ezekiel:47:1|. C.C. Torrey refers to strkjv@Zechariah:14:8|. But the Eastern writers refer \autou\ (his) to the believer who not only quenches in Christ his own thirst, but becomes a source of new streams for others (John:4:14|). It is a difficult question and Westcott finally changed his view and held \autou\ to refer to Christ. \Reusousin\ is future active indicative of \re\, old verb, to flow, here only in the N.T.
rwp@John:8:25 @{Who art thou?} (\Su tis ei;\). Proleptic use of \su\ before \tis\, "Thou, who art thou?" Cf. strkjv@1:19|. He had virtually claimed to be the Messiah and on a par with God as in strkjv@5:15|. They wish to pin him down and to charge him with blasphemy. {Even that which I have also spoken unto you from the beginning} (\tn archn hoti kai lal humin\). A difficult sentence. It is not clear whether it is an affirmation or a question. The Latin and Syriac versions treat it as affirmative. Westcott and Hort follow Meyer and take it as interrogative. The Greek fathers take it as an exclamation. It seems clear that the adverbial accusative \tn archn\ cannot mean "from the beginning" like \ap' archs\ (15:27|) or \ex archs\ (16:4|). The LXX has \tn archn\ for "at the beginning" or "at the first" (Genesis:43:20|). There are examples in Greek, chiefly negative, where \tn archn\ means "at all," "essentially," "primarily." Vincent and Bernard so take it here, "Primarily what I am telling you." Jesus avoids the term Messiah with its political connotations. He stands by his high claims already made.
rwp@John:8:53 @{Art thou greater than our father Abraham?} (\M su meizn ei tou patros hmn Abraam;\). Negative answer expected by \m\ with ablative case of comparison in \patros\ after \meizn\. The question was designed to put Jesus in a difficult position, for Abraham and the prophets all "died." They do not see that Jesus uses death in a different sense. {Whom makest thou thyself?} (\tina seauton poieis;\). \Seauton\ is predicate accusative with \poieis\. They suspect that Jesus is guilty of blasphemy as they charged in strkjv@5:18| in making himself equal with God. Later they will make it specifically (10:33; strkjv@19:7|). They set a trap for Jesus for this purpose.
rwp@John:16:13 @{Howbeit} (\de\). One of the most delicate and difficult particles to translate, varying from "and" to "but." {When he, the Spirit of truth, is come} (\hotan elthi ekeinos, to pneuma ts altheias\). Indefinite relative clause (\hotan\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\, no _futurum exactum_), "whenever he comes." Note \ekeinos\ (masculine demonstrative pronoun, though followed by neuter \pneuma\ in apposition. See strkjv@15:26| for this phrase about the Holy Spirit. He shall guide you (\hodgsei humas\). Future active of old verb \hodge\ (from \hodgos\, from \hodos\, way, \hgeomai\, to lead). See strkjv@Psalms:24:5| for "lead me into thy truth" (\hodgson me eis tn altheian sou\). Christ is both the Way and the Truth (14:6|) and the Holy Spirit is the Guide who shows the way to the Truth (verse 14|). This he does gradually. We are still learning the truth in Christ. {From himself} (\aph' heautou\). In this he is like Christ (1:26; strkjv@12:49; strkjv@14:10|). {He shall declare} (\anaggelei\). Future active of \anaggell\, as in strkjv@4:25|. See it also repeated in verse 14|. {The things that are yet to come} (\ta erchomena\). Neuter plural articular participle of \erchomai\, "the coming things." This phrase only here in the N.T. The things already begun concerning the work of the Kingdom (Luke:7:19ff.; strkjv@18:30|) not a chart of future history. See strkjv@Luke:7:20; strkjv@John:6:14; strkjv@11:27| for \ho erchomenos\ (the coming one) used of the Messiah.
rwp@John:17:3 @{Should know} (\ginsksin\). Present active subjunctive with \hina\ (subject clause), "should keep on knowing." {Even Jesus Christ} (\Isoun Christon\). See strkjv@1:17| for the only other place in John's Gospel where the words occur together. Coming here in the Lord's own prayer about himself they create difficulty, unless, as Westcott suggests, \Christon\ be regarded as a predicate accusative, "Jesus as the Christ" (Messiah). Otherwise the words would seem to be John's parenthetical interpretation of the idea of Jesus. Lucke thinks that the solemnity of this occasion explains Jesus referring to himself in the third person. The knowledge of "the only true God" is through Jesus Christ (14:6-9|).
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:2:47 @{Were amazed} (\existanto\). Imperfect indicative middle, descriptive of their continued and repeated astonishment. Common verb \existmi\ meaning that they stood out of themselves as if their eyes were bulging out. The boy had a holy thirst for knowledge (Plummer), and he used a boy's way of learning. {At his understanding} (\epi ti sunesei\). Based on (\epi\), the grasp and comprehension from \sunimi\, comparing and combining things. Cf. strkjv@Mark:12:33|. {His answers} (\tais apokrisesin autou\). It is not difficult to ask hard questions, but this boy had astounding answers to their questions, revealing his amazing intellectual and spiritual growth.
rwp@Luke:5:19 @{By what way they might bring him in} (\poias eis enegksin auton\). Deliberative subjunctive of the direct question retained in the indirect. {The housetop} (\to dma\). Very old word. The flat roof of Jewish houses was usually reached by outside stairway. Cf. strkjv@Acts:10:9| where Peter went for meditation. {Through the tiles} (\dia tn keramn\). Common and old word for the tile roof. strkjv@Mark:2:4| speaks of digging a hole in this tile roof. {Let him down} (\kathkan auton\). First aorist (k aorist) effective active of \kathimi\, common verb. strkjv@Mark:2:4| has historical present \chalsi\, the verb used by Jesus to Peter and in Peter's reply (Luke:5:4f.|). {With his couch} (\sun ti klinidii\). Also in verse 24|. Diminutive of \klin\ (verse 18|) occurring in Plutarch and _Koin_ writers. strkjv@Mark:2:4| has \krabatton\ (pallet). It doubtless was a pallet on which the paralytic lay. {Into the midst before Jesus} (\eis to meson emprosthen tou Isou\). The four friends had succeeded, probably each holding a rope to a corner of the pallet. It was a moment of triumph over difficulties and surprise to all in the house (Peter's apparently, strkjv@Mark:2:1|).
rwp@Matthew:10:16 @{As sheep in the midst of wolves} (\hs probata en mesi lukn\). The presence of wolves on every hand was a fact then and now. Some of these very sheep (10:6|) at the end will turn out to be wolves and cry for Christ's crucifixion. The situation called for consummate wisdom and courage. The serpent was the emblem of wisdom or shrewdness, intellectual keenness (Genesis:3:1; strkjv@Psalms:58:5|), the dove of simplicity (Hosea:7:11|). It was a proverb, this combination, but one difficult of realization. Either without the other is bad (rascality or gullibility). The first clause with \arnas\ for \probata\ is in strkjv@Luke:10:3| and apparently is in a _Fragment of a Lost Gospel_ edited by Grenfell and Hunt. The combination of wariness and innocence is necessary for the protection of the sheep and the discomfiture of the wolves. For "harmless" (\akeraioi\) Moffatt and Goodspeed have "guileless," Weymouth "innocent." The word means "unmixed" (\a\ privative and \kerannumi\), "unadulterated," "simple," "unalloyed."
rwp@Matthew:11:12 @{Suffereth violence} (\biazetai\). This verb occurs only here and in strkjv@Luke:16:16| in the N.T. It seems to be middle in Luke and Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 258) quotes an inscription "where \biazomai\ is without doubt reflexive and absolute" as in strkjv@Luke:16:16|. But there are numerous papyri examples where it is passive (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_, etc.) so that "there seems little that promises decisive help for the difficult Logion of strkjv@Matthew:11:12; strkjv@Luke:16:16|." Songs:then in strkjv@Matthew:11:12| the form can be either middle or passive and either makes sense, though a different sense. The passive idea is that the kingdom is forced, is stormed, is taken by men of violence like "men of violence take it by force" (\biastai harpazousin autn\) or seize it like a conquered city. The middle voice may mean "experiences violence" or "forces its way" like a rushing mighty wind (so Zahn holds). These difficult words of Jesus mean that the preaching of John "had led to a violent and impetuous thronging to gather round Jesus and his disciples" (Hort, _Judaistic Christianity_, p. 26).
rwp@Matthew:11:19 @{Wisdom is justified by her works} (\edikaith apo tn ergn auts\). A timeless aorist passive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 836f.). The word "justified" means "set right" Luke (Luke:7:35|) has "by all her children" as some MSS. have here to make Matthew like Luke. These words are difficult, but understandable. God's wisdom has planned the different conduct of both John and Jesus. He does not wish all to be just alike in everything. "This generation" (verse 16|) is childish, not childlike, and full of whimsical inconsistencies in their faultfinding. They exaggerate in each case. John did not have a demon and Jesus was not a glutton or a winebibber. "And, worse than either, for \philos\ is used in a sinister sense and implies that Jesus was the comrade of the worst characters, and like them in conduct. A malicious nickname at first, it is now a name of honour: the sinner's lover" (Bruce). Cf. strkjv@Luke:15:2|. The plan of God is justified by results.
rwp@Matthew:13:1 @{On that day} (\en ti hmerai ekeini\). Songs:this group of parables is placed by Matthew on the same day as the blasphemous accusation and the visit of the mother of Jesus. It is called "the Busy Day," not because it was the only one, but simply that so much is told of this day that it serves as a specimen of many others filled to the full with stress and strain. {Sat by the seaside} (\ekathto para tn thalassan\). The accusative case need give no difficulty. Jesus came out of the stuffy house and took his seat (\ekathto\, imperfect) along the shore with the crowds stretched up and down, a picturesque scene.
rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{I will build my church} (\oikodoms mou tn ekklsian\). It is the figure of a building and he uses the word \ekklsian\ which occurs in the New Testament usually of a local organization, but sometimes in a more general sense. What is the sense here in which Jesus uses it? The word originally meant "assembly" (Acts:19:39|), but it came to be applied to an "unassembled assembly" as in strkjv@Acts:8:3| for the Christians persecuted by Saul from house to house. "And the name for the new Israel, \ekklsia\, in His mouth is not an anachronism. It is an old familiar name for the congregation of Israel found in Deut. (Deuteronomy:18:26; strkjv@23:2|) and Psalms (Psalms:22:36|), both books well known to Jesus" (Bruce). It is interesting to observe that in strkjv@Psalms:89| most of the important words employed by Jesus on this occasion occur in the LXX text. Songs:\oikodoms\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:5|; \ekklsia\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:6|; \katischu\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:22|; \Christos\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:39,52|; \hids\ in strkjv@Psalms:89:49| (\ek cheiros hidou\). If one is puzzled over the use of "building" with the word \ekklsia\ it will be helpful to turn to strkjv@1Peter:2:5|. Peter, the very one to whom Jesus is here speaking, writing to the Christians in the five Roman provinces in Asia (1Peter:1:1|), says: "You are built a spiritual house" (\oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos\). It is difficult to resist the impression that Peter recalls the words of Jesus to him on this memorable occasion. Further on (1Peter:2:9|) he speaks of them as an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, showing beyond controversy that Peter's use of building a spiritual house is general, not local. This is undoubtedly the picture in the mind of Christ here in strkjv@16:18|. It is a great spiritual house, Christ's Israel, not the Jewish nation, which he describes. What is the rock on which Christ will build his vast temple? Not on Peter alone or mainly or primarily. Peter by his confession was furnished with the illustration for the rock on which His church will rest. It is the same kind of faith that Peter has just confessed. The perpetuity of this church general is guaranteed.
rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{The gates of Hades} (\pulai hidou\) {shall not prevail against it} (\ou katischusousin auts\). Each word here creates difficulty. Hades is technically the unseen world, the Hebrew Sheol, the land of the departed, that is death. Paul uses \thanate\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:55| in quoting strkjv@Hosea:13:14| for \hid\. It is not common in the papyri, but it is common on tombstones in Asia Minor, "doubtless a survival of its use in the old Greek religion" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The ancient pagans divided Hades (\a\ privative and \idein\, to see, abode of the unseen) into Elysium and Tartarus as the Jews put both Abraham's bosom and Gehenna in Sheol or Hades (cf. strkjv@Luke:16:25|). Christ was in Hades (Acts:2:27,31|), not in Gehenna. We have here the figure of two buildings, the Church of Christ on the Rock, the House of Death (Hades). "In the Old Testament the 'gates of Hades' (Sheol) never bears any other meaning (Isaiah:38:10|; Wisd. strkjv@16:3; 3Macc. strkjv@5:51) than death," McNeile claims. See also strkjv@Psalms:9:13; strkjv@107:18; strkjv@Job:38:17| (\pulai thanatou pulroi hidou\). It is not the picture of Hades _attacking_ Christ's church, but of death's possible victory over the church. "The \ekklsia\ is built upon the Messiahship of her master, and death, the gates of Hades, will not prevail against her by keeping Him imprisoned. It was a mysterious truth, which He will soon tell them in plain words (verse 21|); it is echoed in strkjv@Acts:2:24,31|" (McNeile). Christ's church will prevail and survive because He will burst the gates of Hades and come forth conqueror. He will ever live and be the guarantor of the perpetuity of His people or church. The verb \katischu\ (literally have strength against, \ischu\ from \ischus\ and \kat-\) occurs also in strkjv@Luke:21:36; strkjv@23:23|. It appears in the ancient Greek, the LXX, and in the papyri with the accusative and is used in the modern Greek with the sense of gaining the mastery over. The wealth of imagery in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| makes it difficult to decide each detail, but the main point is clear. The \ekklsia\ which consists of those confessing Christ as Peter has just done will not cease. The gates of Hades or bars of Sheol will not close down on it. Christ will rise and will keep his church alive. _Sublime Porte_ used to be the title of Turkish power in Constantinople.
rwp@Revelation:7:4 @{The number of the sealed} (\ton arithmon tn esphragismenn\). Accusative case object of \kousa\ and genitive of the perfect passive articular participle of \sphragiz\. He did not see the sealing or count them himself, but only heard. {A hundred and forty and four thousand} (\hekaton tesserakonta tessares chiliades\). Symbolical, of course, and not meant to be a complete number of the sealed (or saved) even in that generation, let alone for all time. The number connotes perfection (Alford), 12x12x1000 = a hundred and forty-four thousands (\chiliades\, strkjv@5:11|). Nominative absolute, not agreeing in case either with \arithmon\ (accusative) or \esphragismenn\ (genitive). Songs:as to the case of \esphragismenoi\. {Out of every tribe of the children of Israel} (\ek pss phuls huin Isral\). There are two opposite views here, one taking the sealed as referring only to Jews (either actual Jews as a remnant or just Jewish Christians), the other including Gentiles as well as Jewish Christians, that is the true Israel as in strkjv@2:9; strkjv@3:9ff.| and like Paul in Galatians and Romans. This is the more probable view and it takes the twelve tribes in a spiritual sense. But in either view there remains the difficulty about names of the tribes. The list is not geographical, since Levi is included, but Dan is omitted and Manasseh put in his place, though he as the son of Joseph is included in Joseph. Irenaeus suggested that Antichrist was expected to come from the tribe of Dan and hence the omission here. There are various lists of the tribes in the O.T. (Genesis:35:22f.; strkjv@46:8ff.,49; strkjv@Exodus:1:1ff.; strkjv@Numbers:1:2; strkjv@13:4ff; strkjv@26:34; strkjv@Deuteronomy:27:11f.; strkjv@33:6ff.; strkjv@Joshua:13-22; strkjv@Judges:5; strkjv@1Chronicles:2-8; strkjv@12:24ff.; strkjv@27:16ff.; strkjv@Ezekiel:48|) and given in various orders. In strkjv@1Chronicles:7:12| both Dan and Zebulon are omitted. Joseph is given here in place of Ephraim. The distribution is equal (12,000) to each tribe.
rwp@Revelation:17:10 @{Seven kings} (\basileis hepta\). This is another change in the symbolism. The identification of these seven kings is one of the puzzles of the book. {The five are fallen} (\hoi pente epesan\). Second aorist active indicative of \pipt\ with the \-an\ ending. Common for the downfall of kings (Ezekiel:29:5; strkjv@30:6; strkjv@Isaiah:21:9|, etc.). See strkjv@2Samuel:3:38|. {The one is} (\ho heis estin\). The one when this vision is dated. {The other is not yet come} (\ho allos oup lthen\). Prophetic second aorist active of \erchomai\. Charles takes this as the date of this "source" or part of the Apocalypse. But John could himself have used this language in the time of Domitian even if he was the one who had not yet come. The difficulty about counting these emperors is that Galba, Otho, Vitellius reigned so briefly that they hardly merit being included. {When he cometh} (\hotan elthi\). Indefinite temporal clause for the future, with \hotan\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\, "whenever he comes." {He must continue a little while} (\oligon auton dei meinai\). Swete takes this to be Titus, who died September 13, 81, after a short reign.
rwp@Revelation:21:20 @Sardonyx (\sardonux\), here only in N.T., white with layers of red, from sardion (red carnelian) and onyx (white); for sardius (\sardion\) see strkjv@4:3|; chrysolite (\chrusolithos\), here only in N.T. (Exodus:28:20|), stone of a golden colour like our topaz or amber or a yellow beryl or golden jasper; beryl (\brullos\), again here only in N.T. (Exodus:28:20|), note the difficulty of identification, much like the emerald according to Pliny; for topaz (\topazion\), here only in N.T. (Exodus:28:17|), a golden-greenish stolle; chrysoprase (chrusoprasos), here only in N.T. (not in LXX), in colour like a teek, translucent golden-green; jacinth (\huakinthos\), of the colour of the hyacinth, a violet colour (Pliny), already in strkjv@9:17| like blue smoke, like achates in LXX; amethyst (\amethustos\), only here in N.T. (Exodus:28:19|), of a violet and purple colour, more brilliant than the \huakinthos\. Swete sums up the colours thus: blue (sapphire, jacinth, amethyst), green (jasper, chalcedony, emerald, beryl, topaz, chrysoprase), red (sardonyx, sardius), yellow (chrysolite). But even so there is great variety in hue and brilliancy and in the reaction on each other. Clement of Alexandria argues that this variety illustrates the variety of gifts and graces in the twelve apostles. Possibly so.
rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE REVELATION OF JOHN ABOUT A.D. 95 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION DIFFICULTY IN THE PROBLEM Perhaps no single book in the New Testament presents so many and so formidable problems as the Apocalypse of John. These difficulties concern the authorship, the date, the apocalyptic method, the relation to the other Johannine books, the purpose, the historical environment, the reception of the book in the New Testament canon, the use and misuse of the book through the ages, etc. In the eastern churches the recognition of the Apocalypse of John was slower than in the west, since it was not in the Peshitta Syriac Version. Caius of Rome attributed the book to Cerinthus the Gnostic, but he was ably answered by Hippolytus, who attributed it to the Apostle John. The Council of Laodicea (about A.D. 360) omitted it, but the third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) accepted it. The dispute about millenarianism led Dionysius of Alexandria (middle of the third century, A.D.) to deny the authorship to the Apostle John, though he accepted it as canonical. Eusebius suggested a second John as the author. But finally the book was accepted in the east as Hebrews was in the west after a period of doubt.
rwp@Info_Romans @ THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS SPRING OF A.D. 57 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE The genuineness of the Epistle is so generally admitted by scholars that it is unnecessary to prove it here, for Loman, Steck, and the Dutch scholars (Van Manen, etc.) who deny it as Pauline are no longer taken seriously. He wrote it from Corinth because he sent it to Rome by Phoebe of Cenchreae (Romans:16:2|) if chapter 16 is acknowledged to be a part of the Epistle. Chapter 16 is held by some to be really a short epistle to Ephesus because of the long list of names in it, because of Paul's long stay in Ephesus, because he had not yet been to Rome, and because, in particular, Aquila and Priscilla are named (Romans:16:3-5|) who had been with Paul in Ephesus. But they had come from Rome before going to Corinth and there is no reason for thinking that they did not return to Rome. It was quite possible for Paul to have many friends in Rome whom he had met elsewhere. People naturally drifted to Rome from all over the empire. The old MSS. (Aleph A B C D) give chapter 16 as an integral part of the Epistle. Marcion rejected it and chapter 15 also for reasons of his own. Renan's theory that Romans was a circular letter like Ephesians sent in different forms to different churches (Rome, Ephesus, Thessalonica, etc.) has appealed to some scholars as explaining the several doxologies in the Epistle, but they cause no real difficulty since Paul interjected them in his other epistles according to his moods (2Corinthians:1:20|, for instance). That theory raises more problems than it solves as, for example, Paul's remarks about going to Rome (Romans:1:9-16|) which apply to Rome. Lightfoot suggests the possibility that Paul added strkjv@Romans:16:25-27| some years after the original date so as to turn it into a circular letter. But the MSS. do not support that theory and that leaves strkjv@Romans:15:22-33 in the Epistle quite unsuitable to a circular letter. Modern knowledge leaves the Epistle intact with occasional variations in the MSS. on particular points as is true of all the N.T.
rwp@Romans:2:17 @{Bearest the name} (\eponomazi\). Present passive indicative in condition of first class of \eponomaz\, old word, to put a name upon (\epi\), only here in N.T. "Thou art surnamed Jew" (Lightfoot). Jew as opposed to Greek denoted nationality while Hebrew accented the idea of language. {Restest upon the law} (\epanapaui nomi\). Late and rare double compound, in LXX and once in the Didache. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:10:6| which see. It means to lean upon, to refresh oneself back upon anything, here with locative case (\nomi\). It is the picture of blind and mechanical reliance on the Mosaic law. {Gloriest in God} (\kauchsai en thei\). _Koin_ vernacular form for \kauchi\ (\kauchaesai, kauchsai\) of \kauchaomai\ as in verse 23; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:7| and \katakauchsai\ in strkjv@Romans:11:18|. The Jew gloried in God as a national asset and private prerogative (2Corinthians:10:15; strkjv@Galatians:6:13|). {Approvest the things that are excellent} (\dokimazeis ta diapheronta\). Originally, "Thou testest the things that differ," and then as a result comes the approval for the excellent things. As in strkjv@Phillipians:1:10| it is difficult to tell which stage of the process Paul has in mind. {Instructed out of the law} (\katchoumenos ek tou nomou\). Present passive participle of \katche\, a rare verb to instruct, though occurring in the papyri for legal instruction. See on ¯Luke:1:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:19|. The Jew's "ethical discernment was the fruit of catechetical and synagogical instruction in the Old Testament" (Shedd).
rwp@Romans:3:9 @{What then?} (\ti oun?\). Paul's frequent query, to be taken with verses 1,2|. {Are we in worse case than they?} (\proechometha?\). The American Revisers render it: "Are we in better case than they?" There is still no fresh light on this difficult and common word though it occurs alone in the N.T. In the active it means to have before, to excel. But here it is either middle or passive. Thayer takes it to be middle and to mean to excel to one's advantage and argues that the context demands this. But no example of the middle in this sense has been found. If it is taken as passive, Lightfoot takes it to mean, "Are we excelled" and finds that sense in Plutarch. Vaughan takes it as passive but meaning, "Are we preferred?" This suits the context, but no other example has been found. Songs:the point remains unsettled. The papyri throw no light on it. {No, in no wise} (\ou pants\). "Not at all." See strkjv@1Corinthians:5:10|. {We before laid to the charge} (\proitiasametha\). First aorist middle indicative of \proaitiaomai\, to make a prior accusation, a word not yet found anywhere else. Paul refers to strkjv@1:18-32| for the Greeks and strkjv@2:1-29| for the Jews. The infinitive \einai\ with the accusative \pantas\ is in indirect discourse. {Under sin} (\hupo hamartian\). See strkjv@Galatians:3:22; strkjv@Romans:7:14|.
rwp@Romans:3:19 @{That every mouth may be stopped} (\hina pn stoma phragi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist passive subjunctive of \phrass\, old verb to fence in, to block up. See strkjv@2Corinthians:11:10|. Stopping mouths is a difficult business. See strkjv@Titus:1:11| where Paul uses \epistomizein\ (to stop up the mouth) for the same idea. Paul seems here to be speaking directly to Jews (\tois en ti nomi\), the hardest to convince. With the previous proof on that point he covers the whole ground for he made the case against the Gentiles in strkjv@1:18-32|. {May be brought under the judgement of God} (\hupodikos gentai ti thei\). "That all the world (Jew as well as Gentile) may become (\gentai\) answerable (\hupodikos\, old forensic word, here only in N.T.) to God (dative case \ti thei\)." Every one is "liable to God," in God's court.
rwp@Romans:5:1 @{Being therefore justified by faith} (\dikaithentes oun ek pistes\). First aorist passive participle of \dikaio\, to set right and expressing antecedent action to the verb \echmen\. The \oun\ refers to the preceding conclusive argument (chapters 1 to 4) that this is done by faith. {Let us have peace with God} (\eirnn echmen pros ton theon\). This is the correct text beyond a doubt, the present active subjunctive, not \echomen\ (present active indicative) of the Textus Receptus which even the American Standard Bible accepts. It is curious how perverse many real scholars have been on this word and phrase here. Godet, for instance. Vincent says that "it is difficult if not impossible to explain it." One has only to observe the force of the _tense_ to see Paul's meaning clearly. The mode is the volitive subjunctive and the present tense expresses linear action and so does not mean "make peace" as the ingressive aorist subjunctive \eirnn schmen\ would mean. A good example of \schmen\ occurs in strkjv@Matthew:21:38| (\schmen tn klronomian autou\) where it means: "Let us get hold of his inheritance." Here \eirnn echmen\ can only mean: "Let us enjoy peace with God" or "Let us retain peace with God." We have in strkjv@Acts:9:31| \eichen eirnn\ (imperfect and so linear), the church "enjoyed peace," not "made peace." The preceding justification (\dikaithentes\) "made peace with God." Observe \pros\ (face to face) with \ton theon\ and \dia\ (intermediate agent) with \tou kuriou\.
rwp@Romans:9:6 @{But it is not as though} (\ouch hoion de hoti\). Supply \estin\ after \ouch\: "But it is not such as that," an old idiom, here alone in N.T. {Hath come to nought} (\ekpeptken\). Perfect active indicative of \ekpipt\, old verb, to fall out. {For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel} (\ou gar pantes hoi ex Isral houtoi Isral\). "For not all those out of Israel (the literal Jewish nation), these are Israel (the spiritual Israel)." This startling paradox is not a new idea with Paul. He had already shown (Galatians:3:7-9|) that those of faith are the true sons of Abraham. He has amplified that idea also in strkjv@Romans:4|. Songs:he is not making a clever dodge here to escape a difficulty. He now shows how this was the original purpose of God to include only those who believed. {Seed of Abraham} (\sperma Abraam\). Physical descent here, but spiritual seed by promise in verse 8|. He quotes strkjv@Genesis:21:12f|.
rwp@Romans:11:15 @{The casting away of them} (\h apobol autn\). Objective genitive (\autn\) with \apobol\, old word from \apoball\, to throw off (Mark:10:50|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:27:22|. {The reconciling of the world} (\katallag kosmou\). See strkjv@5:10f.| for \katallag\ (reconciling). It explains verse 12|. {The receiving} (\h proslmpsis\). Old word from \proslamban\, to take to oneself, only here in N.T. {Life from the dead} (\z ek nekrn\). Already the conversion of Jews had become so difficult. It is like a miracle of grace today, though it does happen. Many think that Paul means that the general resurrection and the end will come when the Jews are converted. Possibly so, but it is by no means certain. His language may be merely figurative.
rwp@Romans:11:25 @{This mystery} (\to mustrion touto\). Not in the pagan sense of an esoteric doctrine for the initiated (from \mue\, to blink, to wink), unknown secrets (2Thessalonians:2:7|), or like the mystery religions of the time, but the revealed will of God now made known to all (1Corinthians:2:1,7; strkjv@4:1|) which includes Gentiles also (Romans:16:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:26f.; strkjv@Ephesians:3:3f.|) and so far superior to man's wisdom (Colossians:2:2; strkjv@4:13; strkjv@Ephesians:3:9; strkjv@5:32; strkjv@6:19; strkjv@Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Mark:4:11|). Paul has covered every point of difficulty concerning the failure of the Jews to accept Jesus as the Messiah and has shown how God has overruled it for the blessing of the Gentiles with a ray of hope still held out for the Jews. "In early ecclesiastical Latin \mustrion\ was rendered by _sacramentum_, which in classical Latin means _the military oath_. The explanation of the word _sacrament_, which is so often founded on this etymology, is therefore mistaken, since the meaning of sacrament belongs to \mustrion\ and not to _sacramentum_ in the classical sense" (Vincent). {Wise in your own conceits} (\en heautois phronimoi\). "Wise in yourselves." Some MSS. read \par' heautois\ (by yourselves). Negative purpose here (\hina m te\), to prevent self-conceit on the part of the Gentiles who have believed. They had no merit in themselves {A hardening} (\prsis\). Late word from \pro\ (11:7|). Occurs in Hippocrates as a medical term, only here in N.T. save strkjv@Mark:3:5; strkjv@Ephesians:4:18|. It means obtuseness of intellectual discernment, mental dulness. {In part} (\apo merous\). Goes with the verb \gegonen\ (has happened in part). For \apo merous\, see strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14; strkjv@2:5; strkjv@Romans:15:24|; for \ana meros\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:27|; for \ek merous\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:12:27; strkjv@13:9|; for \kata meros\, see strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|; for \meros ti\ (adverbial accusative) partly see strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18|. Paul refuses to believe that no more Jews will be saved. {Until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in} (\achri hou to plrma tn ethnn eiselthi\). Temporal clause with \achri hou\ (until which time) and the second aorist active subjunctive of \eiserchomai\, to come in (Matthew:7:13,21|). {For fulness of the Gentiles} (\to plrma tn ethnn\) see on verse ¯12|, the complement of the Gentiles.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}