Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp eipen:

rwp@2Timothy:4:10 @{Forsook me} (\me egkateleipen\). Imperfect (MSS. also have aorist, \egkatelipen\) active of the old double compound verb \egkataleip\, for which see strkjv@Romans:9:29|. Clearly in contrast to verse 9| and in the sense of strkjv@1Timothy:6:17|, wilful desertion. Only mentioned elsewhere in strkjv@Colossians:4:14|. {Crescens} (\Krsks\). No other mention of him. {Titus to Dalmatia} (\Titos eis Dalmatian\). Titus had been asked to rejoin Paul in Nicopolis where he was to winter, probably the winter previous to this one (Titus:3:12|). He came and has been with Paul.

rwp@John:5:15 @{Went away and told} (\aplthen kai eipen\). Both aorist active indicatives. Instead of giving heed to the warning of Jesus about his own sins he went off and told the Jews that now he knew who the man was who had commanded him to take up his bed on the Sabbath Day, to clear himself with the ecclesiastics and escape a possible stoning. {That it was Jesus} (\hoti Isous estin\). Present indicative preserved in indirect discourse. The man was either ungrateful and wilfully betrayed Jesus or he was incompetent and did not know that he was bringing trouble on his benefactor. In either case one has small respect for him.

rwp@John:12:44 @{Cried and said} (\ekraxen kai eipen\). First aorist active indicative of \kraz\, to cry aloud, and second aorist active of defective verb \er\, to say. This is probably a summary of what Jesus had already said as in verse 36| John closes the public ministry of Jesus without the Synoptic account of the last day in the temple on our Tuesday (Mark:11:27-12:44; strkjv@Matthew:21:23-23:39; strkjv@Luke:20:1-21:4|). {Not on me, but on him} (\ou eis eme, alla eis ton\). "Not on me only, but also on," another example of exaggerated contrast like that in verse 30|. The idea of Jesus here is a frequent one (believing on Jesus whom the Father has sent) as in strkjv@3:17f.; strkjv@5:23f.,30,43; strkjv@7:16; strkjv@8:42; strkjv@13:20; strkjv@14:1; strkjv@Matthew:10:40; strkjv@Luke:9:48|.

rwp@John:13:12 @{Sat down again} (\anepesen palin\). Second aorist active indicative of \anapipt\, old compound verb to fall back, to lie down, to recline. \Palin\ (again) can be taken either with \anepesen\, as here, or with \eipen\ (he said again). {Know ye what I have done to you?} (\ginskete ti pepoika humin;\). "Do ye understand the meaning of my act?" Perfect active indicative of \poie\ with dative case (\humin\). It was a searching question, particularly to Simon Peter and Judas.

rwp@John:19:21 @{But that he said} (\all' hoti ekeinos eipen\). The chief priests were uneasy for fear that the joke in the mock title was on them instead of on Jesus. They were right in their fear.

rwp@Luke:4:24 @{And he said} (\eipen de\). Also in strkjv@1:13|. The interjection of these words here by Luke may indicate a break in his address, though there is no other indication of an interval here. Perhaps they only serve to introduce solemnly the new proverb like the words {Verily I say unto you} (\amn leg humin\). This proverb about the prophet having no honour in his own country Jesus had already applied to himself according to strkjv@John:4:44|. Both strkjv@Mark:6:4| and strkjv@Matthew:13:57| give it in a slightly altered form on the last visit of Jesus to Nazareth. The devil had tempted Jesus to make a display of his power to the people by letting them see him floating down from the pinnacle of the temple (Luke:4:9-11|).

rwp@Luke:5:24 @{He saith unto him that was palsied} (\eipen ti paralelumeni\). This same parenthesis right in the midst of the words of Jesus is in strkjv@Mark:2:11; strkjv@Matthew:9:6|, conclusive proof of interrelation between these documents. The words of Jesus are quoted practically alike in all three Gospels, the same purpose also \hina eidte\ (second perfect active subjunctive).

rwp@Luke:6:39 @{Also a parable} (\kai paraboln\). Plummer thinks that the second half of the sermon begins here as indicated by Luke's insertion of "And he spake (\eipen de\) at this point. Luke has the word parable some fifteen times both for crisp proverbs and for the longer narrative comparisons. This is the only use of the term parable concerning the metaphors in the Sermon on the Mount. But in both Matthew and Luke's report of the discourse there are some sixteen possible applications of the word. Two come right together: The blind leading the blind, the mote and the beam. Matthew gives the parabolic proverb of the blind leading the blind later (Matthew:15:14|). Jesus repeated these sayings on various occasions as every teacher does his characteristic ideas. Songs:Luke strkjv@6:40; strkjv@Matthew:10:24|, strkjv@Luke:6:45; strkjv@Matthew:12:34f.| {Can} (\Mti dunatai\). The use of \mti\ in the question shows that a negative answer is expected. {Guide} (\hodgein\). Common verb from \hodgos\ (guide) and this from \hodos\ (way) and \hgeomai\, to lead or guide. {Shall they not both fall?} (\ouchi amphoteroi empesountai;\). \Ouchi\, a sharpened negative from \ouk\, in a question expecting the answer Yes. Future middle indicative of the common verb \empipt\. {Into a pit} (\eis bothunon\). Late word for older \bothros\.

rwp@Matthew:11:25 @{At that season Jesus answered and said} (\en ekeini ti kairi apokritheis eipen\). Spoke to his Father in audible voice. The time and place we do not know. But here we catch a glimpse of Jesus in one of his moods of worship. "It is usual to call this golden utterance a prayer, but it is at once prayer, praise, and self-communing in a devout spirit" (Bruce). Critics are disturbed because this passage from the Logia of Jesus or Q of Synoptic criticism (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|) is so manifestly Johannine in spirit and very language, "the Father" (\ho patr\), "the son" (\ho huios\), whereas the Fourth Gospel was not written till the close of the first century and the Logia was written before the Synoptic Gospels. The only satisfying explanation lies in the fact that Jesus did have this strain of teaching that is preserved in John's Gospel. Here he is in precisely the same mood of elevated communion with the Father that we have reflected in John 14 to 17. Even Harnack is disposed to accept this Logion as a genuine saying of Jesus. The word "thank" (\homologoumai\) is better rendered "praise" (Moffatt). Jesus praises the Father "not that the \sophoi\ were ignorant, but that the \npioi\ knew" (McNeile).

rwp@Matthew:14:18 @{And he said} (\ho de eipen\). Here is the contrast between the helpless doubt of the disciples and the confident courage of Jesus. He used "_the_ five loaves and two fishes" which they had mentioned as a reason for doing nothing. "Bring them hither unto me." They had overlooked the power of Jesus in this emergency.

rwp@Revelation:22:6 @{He said unto me} (\eipen moi\). Apparently the same angel as in strkjv@22:1| (21:9,15|). {These words} (\houtoi hoi logoi\). The same words used in strkjv@21:5| by the angel there. Whatever the application there, here the angel seems to endorse as "faithful and true" (\pistoi kai althinoi\) not merely the preceding vision (21:9-22:5|), but the revelations of the entire book. The language added proves this: "Sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly come to pass" (\apesteilen ton aggelon autou deixai tois doulois autou ha dei genesthai en tachei\), a direct reference to strkjv@1:1| concerning the purpose of Christ's revelation to John in this book. For "the God of the spirits of the prophets" (\ho theos tn pneumatn tn prophtn\) see strkjv@19:10; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:32|. Probably the prophets' own spirits enlightened by the Holy Spirit (10:7; strkjv@11:8; strkjv@22:9|).