Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-PROPHET.filter - rwp failure:

rwp@1Corinthians:1:19 @{I will destroy} (\apol\). Future active indicative of \apollumi\. Attic future for \apoles\. Quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:29:14| (LXX). The failure of worldly statesmanship in the presence of Assyrian invasion Paul applies to his argument with force. The wisdom of the wise is often folly, the understanding of the understanding is often rejected. There is such a thing as the ignorance of the learned, the wisdom of the simple-minded. God's wisdom rises in the Cross sheer above human philosophizing which is still scoffing at the Cross of Christ, the consummation of God's power.

rwp@1Corinthians:2:12 @{But we} (\hmeis de\). We Christians like {us} (\hmin\) in verse 10| of the revelation, but particularly Paul and the other apostles. {Received} (\elabomen\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban\ and so a definite event, though the constative aorist may include various stages. {Not the spirit of the world} (\ou to pneuma tou kosmou\). Probably a reference to the wisdom of this age in verse 6|. See also strkjv@Romans:8:4,6,7; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:4| (\the pneuma heteron\). {But the spirit which is of God} (\alla to pneuma to ek theou\). Rather, "from God" (\ek\), which proceeds from God. {That we might know} (\hina eidmen\). Second perfect subjunctive with \hina\ to express purpose. Here is a distinct claim of the Holy Spirit for understanding (Illumination) the Revelation received. It is not a senseless rhapsody or secret mystery, but God expects us to understand "the things that are freely given us by God" (\ta hupo tou theou charisthenta hmin\). First aorist passive neuter plural articular participle of \charizomai\, to bestow. God gave the revelation through the Holy Spirit and he gives us the illumination of the Holy Spirit to understand the mind of the Spirit. The tragic failures of men to understand clearly God's revealed will is but a commentary on the weakness and limitation of the human intellect even when enlightened by the Holy Spirit.

rwp@1Corinthians:4:4 @{For I know nothing against myself} (\ouden gar emauti sunoida\). Not a statement of fact, but an hypothesis to show the unreliability of mere complacent self-satisfaction. Note the use of \sunoida\ (second perfect active indicative with dative (disadvantage) of the reflexive pronoun) for guilty knowledge against oneself (cf. strkjv@Acts:5:2; strkjv@12:12; strkjv@14:6|). {Yet} (\all'\). Adversative use of \alla\. {Amos:I not hereby justified} (\ouk en touti dedikaimai\). Perfect passive indicative of state of completion. Failure to be conscious of one's own sins does not mean that one is innocent. Most prisoners plead "not guilty." Who is the judge of the steward of the mysteries of God? It is the Lord "that judgeth me" (\ho anakrinn me\). Probably, who examines me and then passes on my fidelity (\pistos\ in verse 2|).

rwp@1Corinthians:6:7 @{Nay, already it is altogether a defect among you} (\d men oun hols httma humin estin\). "Indeed therefore there is to you already (to begin with, \d\, before any question of courts) wholly defeat." \Httma\ (from \httaomai\) is only here, strkjv@Romans:11:12; strkjv@Isaiah:31:8| and ecclesiastical writers. See \httaomai\ (from \httn\, less) in strkjv@2Corinthians:12:13; strkjv@2Peter:2:19f.| \Nik\ was victory and \htta\ defeat with the Greeks. It is defeat for Christians to have lawsuits (\krimata\, usually decrees or judgments) with one another. This was proof of the failure of love and forgiveness (Colossians:3:13|). {Take wrong} (\adikeisthe\). Present middle indicative, of old verb \adike\ (from \adikos\, not right). Better undergo wrong yourself than suffer {defeat} in the matter of love and forgiveness of a brother. {Be defrauded} (\apostereisthe\). Permissive middle again like \adikeisthe\. Allow yourselves to be robbed (old verb to deprive, to rob) rather than have a lawsuit.

rwp@1Corinthians:15:49 @{We shall also bear} (\phoresomen kai\). Old MSS. (so Westcott and Hort) read \phoresmen kai\. Volitive aorist active subjunctive, Let us also bear. Ellicott strongly opposes the subjunctive. It may be merely the failure of scribes to distinguish between long o and short o. Paul hardly means to say that our attaining the resurrection body depends on our own efforts! A late frequentative form of \pher\.

rwp@1Thessalonians:2:4 @{But even as we have been approved by God} (\alla kaths dedokimasmetha hupo tou theou\). Perfect passive indicative of \dokimaz\, old verb to put to the test, but here the tense for completed state means tested and proved and so approved by God. Paul here claims the call of God for his ministry and the seal of God's blessing on his work and also for that of Silas and Timothy. {To be entrusted with the gospel} (\pisteuthnai to euaggelion\). First aorist passive infinitive of \pisteu\, common verb for believing, from \pistis\ (faith), but here to entrust rather than to trust. The accusative of the thing is retained in the passive according to regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:17; strkjv@Galatians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:3:2; strkjv@1Timothy:1:11; strkjv@Titus:1:3|, though the active had the dative of the person. {Songs:we speak} (\houts laloumen\). Simple, yet confident claim of loyalty to God's call and message. Surely this should be the ambition of every preacher of the gospel of God. {Not as pleasing men} (\ouch hs anthrpois areskontes\). Dative case with \aresk\ as in strkjv@Galatians:1:10|. Few temptations assail the preacher more strongly than this one to please men, even if God is not pleased, though with the dim hope that God will after all condone or overlook. Nothing but experience will convince some preachers how fickle is popular favour and how often it is at the cost of failure to please God. And yet the preacher wishes to win men to Christ. It is all as subtle as it is deceptive. God tests our hearts (the very verb \dokimaz\ used in the beginning of this verse) and he is the only one whose approval matters in the end of the day (1Corinthians:4:5|).

rwp@2Corinthians:7:10 @{For godly sorrow} (\h gar kata theon lup\). "For the sorrow according to God" (God's ideal, verse 9|). {Worketh repentance unto salvation a repentance without regret} (\metanoian eis strian ametamelton ergazetai\). This clause alone should have prevented the confusion between mere "sorrow" (\lup\) as indicated in \metamelomai\, to regret (to be sorry again) and "change of mind and life" as shown by \metanoian\ (\metanoe\) and wrongly translated "repentance." The sorrow according to God does work this "change of mind and life" unto salvation, a change "not to be regretted" (\ametamelton\, an old verbal adjective of \metamelomai\ and \a\ privative, but here alone in N.T.). It agrees with \metanoian\, not \strian\. {But the sorrow of the world} (\h de tou kosmou lup\). In contrast, the kind of sorrow that the world has, grief "for failure, not for sin" (Bernard), for the results as seen in Cain, Esau (his tears!), and Judas (remorse, \metemelth\). Works out (perfective use of \kat-\) death in the end.

rwp@2Corinthians:7:14 @{If--I have gloried} (\ei--kekauchmai\). Condition of first class. On this verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:3:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:12|. {I was not put to shame} (\ou katischunthn\). First aorist passive indicative of \kataischun\. Paul had assured Titus, who hesitated to go after the failure of Timothy, that the Corinthians were sound at bottom and would come round all right if handled properly. Paul's joy is equal to that of Titus. {In truth} (\en altheii\). In the sharp letter as well as in I Corinthians. He had not hesitated to speak plainly of their sins. {Our glorying before Titus} (\h kauchsis epi Titou\). The two things were not inconsistent and were not contradictory as the outcome proved.

rwp@Acts:13:39 @{And by him every one that believeth is justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses} (\kai apo pantn hn ouk dunthte en nomi Muses dikaiothnai en touti ps ho pisteun dikaioutai\). This is a characteristic Greek sentence with the principal clause at the end and Pauline to the core. A literal rendering as to the order would be: "And from all the things from (\apo\ not repeated in the Greek, but understood, the ablative case being repeated) which ye were not able to be justified in this one every one who believes is justified." The climax is at the close and gives us the heart of Paul's teaching about Christ. "We have here the germ of all that is most characteristic in Paul's later teaching. It is the argument of the Epistle to Galatians and Romans in a sentence" (Furneaux). The failure of the Mosaic law to bring the kind of righteousness that God demands is stated. This is made possible in and by (\en\) Christ alone. Paul's favourite words occur here, \pisteu\, believe, with which \pistis\, faith, is allied, \dikaio\, to set right with God on the basis of faith. In strkjv@Romans:6:7| Paul uses \apo\ also after \dikaio\. These are key words (\pisteu\ and \dikaio\) in Paul's theology and call for prolonged and careful study if one is to grasp the Pauline teaching. \Dikaio\ primarily means to make righteous, to declare righteous like \axio\, to deem worthy (\axios\). But in the end Paul holds that real righteousness will come (Romans:6-8|) to those whom God treats as righteous (Romans:3-5|) though both Gentile and Jew fall short without Christ (Romans:1-3|). This is the doctrine of grace that will prove a stumbling block to the Jews with their ceremonial works and foolishness to the Greeks with their abstract philosophical ethics (1Corinthians:1:23-25|). It is a new and strange doctrine to the people of Antioch.

rwp@Acts:14:27 @{Gathered the church together} (\sunagagontes tn ekklsian\). Second aorist active participle of \sunag\. It "was the first missionary meeting in history" (Furneaux). It was not hard to get the church together when the news spread that Paul and Barnabas had returned. "The suitability of the Gospel to become the religion of the world had not before been put to the test" (Furneaux). Doubtless many "wise-acres" had predicted failure as they did for William Carey and for Adoniram Judson and Luther Rice. {Rehearsed} (\anggellon\). Imperfect active. It was a long story for they had many things to tell of God's dealings "with them" (\met' autn\) for God had been "with them" all the while as Jesus had said he would be (Matthew:28:20|, \meth' hmn\). Paul could recount some of the details given later in strkjv@2Corinthians:11|. {And how} (\kai hoti\). Or "and that" in particular, as the upshot of it all. {He had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles} (\noixen tois ethnesin thuran pistes\). Three times in Paul's Epistles (1Corinthians:16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@Colossians:4:3|) he employed the metaphor of "door," perhaps a reminiscence of the very language of Paul here. This work in Galatia gained a large place in Paul's heart (Galatians:4:14f.|). The Gentiles now, it was plain, could enter the kingdom of God (verse 22|) through the door of faith, not by law or by circumcision or by heathen philosophy or mythology.

rwp@Acts:17:6 @{When they found them not} (\m heurontes\). Usual negative \m\ with the participle in the _Koin_, second aorist (effective) active participle, complete failure with all the noise and "bums." {They dragged} (\esuron\). Imperfect active, vivid picture, they were dragging (literally). See already strkjv@8:3; strkjv@16:19|. If they could not find Paul, they could drag Jason his host and some other Christians whom we do not know. {Before the rulers of the city} (\epi tous politarchas\). This word does not occur in Greek literature and used to be cited as an example of Luke's blunders. But now it is found in an inscription on an arch in the modern city preserved in the British Museum. It is also found in seventeen inscriptions (five from Thessalonica) where the word or the verb \politarche\ occurs. It is a fine illustration of the historical accuracy of Luke in matters of detail. This title for city officers in Thessalonica, a free city, is correct. They were burgomasters or "rulers of the city." {Crying} (\bontes\). Yelling as if the house was on fire like the mob in Jerusalem (21:28|). {These that have turned the world upside down} (\hoi tn oikoumenn anastatsantes\). The use of \oikoumenn\ (supply \gen\ or \chran\, the inhabited earth, present passive participle of \oike\) means the Roman Empire, since it is a political charge, a natural hyperbole in their excitement, but the phrase occurs for the Roman Empire in strkjv@Luke:2:1|. It is possible that news had come to Thessalonica of the expulsion of the Jews from Rome by Claudius. There is truth in the accusation, for Christianity is revolutionary, but on this particular occasion the uproar (verse 5|) was created by the rabbis and the hired loafers. The verb \anastato\ (here first aorist active participle) does not occur in the ancient writers, but is in LXX and in strkjv@Acts:17:6; strkjv@21:38; strkjv@Galatians:5:12|. It occurs also in Harpocration (A.D. 4th cent.) and about 100 B.C. \exanastato\ is found in a fragment of papyrus (Tebtunis no. 2) and in a Paris Magical Papyrus l. 2243f. But in an Egyptian letter of Aug. 4, 41 A.D. (Oxyrhynchus Pap. no. 119, 10) "the bad boy" uses it = "he upsets me" or " he drives me out of my senses" (\anastatoi me\). See Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 84f. It is not a "Biblical word" at all, but belongs to the current _Koin_. It is a vigorous and graphic term.

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:17:34 @{Clave unto him and believed} (\kollthentes auti episteusan\). First aorist passive of this strong word \kolla\, to glue to, common in Acts (5:13; strkjv@8:29; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@10:28|) No sermon is a failure which leads a group of men (\andres\) to believe (ingressive aorist of \pisteu\) in Jesus Christ. Many so-called great or grand sermons reap no such harvest. {Dionysius the Areopagite} (\Dionusios ho Areopagits\). One of the judges of the Court of the Areopagus. That of itself was no small victory. He was one of this college of twelve judges who had helped to make Athens famous. Eusebius says that he became afterwards bishop of the Church at Athens and died a martyr. {A woman named Damaris} (\gun onomati Damaris\). A woman by name Damaris. Not the wife of Dionysius as some have thought, but an aristocratic woman, not necessarily an educated courtezan as Furneaux holds. And there were "others" (\heteroi\) with them, a group strong enough to keep the fire burning in Athens. It is common to say that Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:1-5| alludes to his failure with philosophy in Athens when he failed to preach Christ crucified and he determined never to make that mistake again. On the other hand Paul determined to stick to the Cross of Christ in spite of the fact that the intellectual pride and superficial culture of Athens had prevented the largest success. As he faced Corinth with its veneer of culture and imitation of philosophy and sudden wealth he would go on with the same gospel of the Cross, the only gospel that Paul knew or preached. And it was a great thing to give the world a sermon like that preached in Athens.

rwp@Acts:19:29 @{With the confusion} (\ts sugchuses\). Genitive case after \eplsth\. An old word, but in the N.T. only here, from verb \sugche\, to pour together like a flood (only in Acts in the N.T.). Vivid description of the inevitable riot that followed "the appearance of such a body in the crowded agora of an excitable city" (Rackham) "vociferating the city's watch-word." {They rushed} (\hrmsan\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \horma\, old verb for impetuous dashing, a case of mob psychology (mob mind), with one accord (\homothumadon\ as in strkjv@Acts:1:14|, etc.). {Into the theatre} (\eis to theatron\). A place for seeing (\theaomai\) spectacles, originally for dramatic representation (Thucydides, Herodotus), then for the spectators, then for the spectacle or show (1Corinthians:4:9|). The theatre (amphitheatre) at Ephesus can still be traced in the ruins (Wood, _Ephesus_) and shows that it was of enormous size capable of seating fifty-six thousand persons (some estimate it only 24,500). It was the place for large public gatherings of any sort out of doors like our football and baseball parks. In particular, gladiatorial shows were held in these theatres. {Having seized Gaius and Aristarchus men of Macedonia} (\sunarpasantes Gaion kai Aristarchon Makedonas\). See strkjv@6:12| for this same verb. They wanted some victims for this "gladiatorial" show. These two men were "Paul's companions in travel" (\sunekdmous Paulou\), together (\sun\) with Paul in being abroad, away from home or people (\ek-dmous\, late word, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:8:19|). How the mob got hold of Gaius (Acts:20:4|) and Aristarchus (20:4; strkjv@27:2; strkjv@Colossians:4:10; strkjv@Philemon:1:24|) we do not know whether by accidental recognition or by search after failure to get Paul. In strkjv@Romans:16:4| Paul speaks of Priscilla and Aquila as those "who for my life laid down their own necks." Paul lived with them in Ephesus as in Corinth. It is possible that Demetrius led the mob to their house and that they refused to allow Paul to go or to be seized at the risk of their own lives. Paul himself may have been desperately ill at this time as we know was the case once during his stay in Ephesus when he felt the answer of death in himself (2Corinthians:1:9|) and when God rescued him. That may mean that, ill as he was, Paul wanted to go and face the mob in the theatre, knowing that it meant certain death.

rwp@Acts:21:14 @{When he would not be persuaded} (\m peithomenou autou\). Genitive absolute of the present passive participle of \peith\. Literally, "he not being persuaded." That was all. Paul's will (\kardia\) was not broken, not even bent. {We ceased} (\hsuchasamen\). Ingressive aorist active indicative of \hsuchaz\, old verb to be quiet, silent. {The will of the Lord be done} (\tou kuriou to thelma ginesth\). Present middle imperative of \ginomai\. There is a quaint naivete in this confession by the friends of Paul. Since Paul would not let them have their way, they were willing for the Lord to have his way, acquiescence after failure to have theirs.

rwp@Acts:21:26 @{Took the men} (\paralabn tous andras\). The very phrase used in verse 24| to Paul. {The next day} (\ti echomeni\). One of the phrases in strkjv@20:15| for the coming day. Locative case of time. {Purifying himself with them} (\sun autois hagnistheis\, first aorist passive participle of \hagniz\). The precise language again of the recommendation in verse 24|. Paul was conforming to the letter. {Went into the temple} (\eisiei eis to hieron\). Imperfect active of \eiseimi\ as in verse 18| which see. Went on into the temple, descriptive imperfect. Paul joined the four men in their vow of separation. {Declaring} (\diaggelln\). To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except strkjv@Romans:11:17| (quotation from the LXX). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). {Until the offering was offered for every one of them} (\hes hou prosnechth huper henos hekastou autn h prosphora\). This use of \hes hou\ (like \hes\, alone) with the first aorist passive indicative \prosnechth\ of \prospher\, to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul's announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:20| when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these "false apostles" over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul's accusers. Songs:far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul's behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul's appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul's alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul's conduct about it.

rwp@Acts:23:6 @{But when Paul perceived} (\gnous de ho Paulos\). Perceiving (second aorist ingressive of \ginsk\). Paul quickly saw that his cause was ruined before the Sanhedrin by his unwitting attack on the high priest. It was impossible to get a fair hearing. Hence, Vincent says, "Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other." Songs:Alford argues with the motto "divide and conquer." Farrar condemns Paul and takes strkjv@24:21| as a confession of error here, but that is reading into Paul's word about the resurrection more than he says. Page considers Luke's report meagre and unsatisfactory. Rackham thinks that the trial was already started and that Paul repeated part of his speech of the day before when "the Sadducees received his words with ostentatious scepticism and ridicule: this provoked counter-expressions of sympathy and credulity among the Pharisees." But all this is inference. We do not have to adopt the Jesuitical principle that the end justifies the means in order to see shrewdness and hard sense in what Paul said and did. Paul knew, of course, that the Sanhedrin was nearly evenly divided between Pharisees and Sadducees, for he himself had been a Pharisee. {I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees} (\Eg Pharisaios eimi huios Pharisain\). This was strictly true as we know from his Epistles (Phillipians:3:5|). {Touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question} (\peri elpidos kai anastases nekrn krinomai\). This was true also and this is the point that Paul mentions in strkjv@24:21|. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke's report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul's cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was "the very centre of his faith" (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (Acts:5:34-39|). Songs:then Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, "Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism" (Page). Paul shows this in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|.

rwp@Acts:24:19 @{But certain Jews from Asia} (\tines de apo ts Alias Ioudaioi\). No verb appears in the Greek for these words. Perhaps he meant to say that "certain Jews from Asia charged me with doing these things." Instead of saying that, Paul stops to explain that they are not here, a thoroughly Pauline anacoluthon (2Corinthians:7:5|) as in strkjv@26:9|. "The passage as it stands is instinct with life, and seems to exhibit the abruptness so characteristic of the Pauline Epistles" (Page). {Who ought to have been here before thee} (\hous edei epi sou pareinai\). This use of \epi\ with genitive of the person is common. The imperfect indicative with verbs of necessity and obligation to express failure to live up to it is common in Greek (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 919-21). "The accusers who were present had not witnessed the alleged offence: those who could have given evidence at first-hand were not present" (Furneaux). There was no case in a Roman court. These Asiatic Jews are never heard of after the riot, though they almost succeeded in killing Paul then. {If they had aught against me} (\ei ti echoien pros eme\). A condition of the fourth class or undetermined with less likelihood of being determined (\ei\ with the optative, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). This is a "mixed condition" (_op.cit._, p. 1022) with a conclusion of the second class.

rwp@Ephesians:2:12 @{Separate from Christ} (\chris Christou\). Ablative case with adverbial preposition \chris\, describing their former condition as heathen. {Alienated from the commonwealth of Israel} (\apllotrimenoi ts politeias tou Isral\). Perfect passive participle of \apallotrio\, for which see strkjv@Colossians:1:21|. Here followed by ablative case \politeias\, old word from \politeu\, to be a citizen (Phillipians:1:27|) from \polits\ and that from \polis\ (city). Only twice in N.T., here as commonwealth (the spiritual Israel or Kingdom of God) and strkjv@Acts:22:28| as citizenship. {Strangers from the covenants of the promise} (\xenoi tn diathkn ts epaggelias\). For \xenos\ (Latin _hospes_), as stranger see strkjv@Matthew:25:35,38,43f.|, as guest-friend see strkjv@Romans:16:23|. Here it is followed by the ablative case \diathkn\. {Having no hope} (\elpida m echontes\). No hope of any kind. In strkjv@Galatians:4:8| \ouk\ (strong negative) occurs with \eidotes theon\, but here \m\ gives a more subjective picture (1Thessalonians:4:5|). {Without God} (\atheoi\). Old Greek word, not in LXX, only here in N.T. Atheists in the original sense of being without God and also in the sense of hostility to God from failure to worship him. See Paul's words in strkjv@Romans:1:18-32|. "In the world" (\en ti kosmi\) goes with both phrases. It is a terrible picture that Paul gives, but a true one.

rwp@Hebrews:4:1 @{Let us fear therefore} (\phobthmen oun\). First aorist passive volitive subjunctive of \phobeomai\, to be afraid. There is no break in the argument on strkjv@Psalms:95|. This is a poor chapter division. The Israelites perished because of disbelief. We today face a real peril. {Lest haply} (\m pote\) Here with the present subjunctive (\dokei\), but future indicative in strkjv@3:12|, after the verb of fearing. For the optative see strkjv@2Timothy:2:25|. {A promise being left} (\kataleipomens epaggelias\). Genitive absolute of the present passive participle of \kataleip\, to leave behind. God's promise still holds good for us in spite of the failure of the Israelites. {Should seem to have come short of it} (\dokei husterkenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \hustere\, old verb from \husteros\ (comparative of root \ud\ like our out, outer, outermost), to be too late, to fail to reach the goal as here, common in the N.T. (11:37; strkjv@12:15|).

rwp@Hebrews:9:9 @{Which} (\htis\). "Which very thing," the first tent (\ts prts skns\, division of the tabernacle), a parenthesis and explanation. {A parable} (\parabol\). Only in the Synoptic Gospels in the N.T. and strkjv@Hebrews:9:9; strkjv@11:19|. See on ¯Matthew:13:3| for the word (from \paraball\, to place alongside). Here like \tupos\ (type or shadow of "the heavenly reality," Moffatt). {For the time now present} (\eis ton kairon ton enestkota\). "For the present crisis " (\kairon\, not \aina\, age, not \chronon\, time). Perfect active articular (repeated article) participle of \enistmi\ (intransitive), the age in which they lived, not the past, not the future. See strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22; strkjv@Romans:8:38| for contrast between \enestta\ and \mellonta\. This age of crisis, foreshadowed by the old tabernacle, pointed on to the richer fulfilment still to come. {According to which} (\kath' hn\). Here the relative refers to \parabol\ just mentioned, not to \skns\. See strkjv@5:1; strkjv@8:3|. {As touching the conscience} (\kata suneidsin\). For \suneidsis\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:8:10; strkjv@10:17; strkjv@Romans:2:15|. This was the real failure of animal sacrifice (10:1-4|). {Make the worshipper perfect} (\teleisai ton latreuonta\). First aorist active infinitive (2:10|). At best it was only ritual or ceremonial purification (7:11|), that called for endless repetition (10:1-4|).

rwp@John:2:4 @{Woman} (\gunai\). Vocative case of \gun\, and with no idea of censure as is plain from its use by Jesus in strkjv@19:26|. But the use of \gunai\ instead of \mter\ (Mother) does show her she can no longer exercise maternal authority and not at all in his Messianic work. That is always a difficult lesson for mothers and fathers to learn, when to let go. {What have I to do with thee?} (\Ti emoi kai soi;\). There are a number of examples of this ethical dative in the LXX (Judges:11:12; strkjv@2Samuel:16:10; strkjv@1Kings:17:18; strkjv@2Kings:3:13; strkjv@2Chronicles:35:21|) and in the N.T. (Mark:1:24; strkjv@5:7; strkjv@Matthew:8:29; strkjv@27:19; strkjv@Luke:8:28|). Some divergence of thought is usually indicated. Literally the phrase means, "What is it to me and to thee?" In this instance F.C. Burkitt (_Journal of Theol. Studies_, July, 1912) interprets it to mean, "What is it to us?" That is certainly possible and suits the next clause also. {Mine hour is not yet come} (\oup hkei h hra mou\). This phrase marks a crisis whenever it occurs, especially of his death (7:30; strkjv@8:20; strkjv@12:23; strkjv@13:1; strkjv@17:1|). Here apparently it means the hour for public manifestation of the Messiahship, though a narrower sense would be for Christ's intervention about the failure of the wine. The Fourth Gospel is written on the plane of eternity (W. M. Ramsay) and that standpoint exists here in this first sign of the Messiah.

rwp@John:5:37 @{He hath borne witness} (\ekeinos memarturken\). \Ekeinos\ (that one; cf. strkjv@5:35,38|), not \autos\. Perfect active indicative of \marture\, the direct witness of the Father, besides the indirect witness of the works. Jesus is not speaking of the voice of the Father at his baptism (Mark:1:11|), the transfiguration (Mark:9:7|), nor even at the time of the visit of the Greeks (John:12:28|). This last voice was heard by many who thought it was thunder or an angel. The language of Jesus refers to the witness of the Father in the heart of the believers as is made plain in strkjv@1John:5:9,10|. God's witness does not come by audible "voice" (\phnn\) nor visible "form" (\eidos\). Cf. strkjv@1:18; strkjv@6:46; strkjv@1John:4:12|. \Akkoate\ is perfect active indicative of \akou\, to hear, and \herakate\ is perfect active indicative of \hora\, to see. It is a permanent state of failure to hear and see God. The experience of Jacob in Peniel (Genesis:32:30|) was unusual, but Jesus will say that those who have seen him have seen the Father (John:14:9|), but here he means the Father's "voice" and "form" as distinct from the Son.

rwp@John:6:26 @{Not because ye saw signs} (\ouch hoti eidete smeia\). Second aorist active indicative of the defective verb \hora\. They had seen the "signs" wrought by Jesus (verse 2|), but this one had led to wild fanaticism (verse 14|) and complete failure to grasp the spiritual lessons. {But because ye ate of the loaves} (\all' hoti ephagete ek tn artn\). Second aorist active indicative of \esthi\, defective verb. {Ye were filled} (\echortasthte\). First aorist passive indicative of \chortaz\, from \chortos\ (grass) as in verse 10|, to eat grass, then to eat anything, to satisfy hunger. They were more concerned with hungry stomachs than with hungry souls. It was a sharp and deserved rebuke.

rwp@John:6:64 @{That believe not} (\hoi ou pisteuousin\). Failure to believe kills the life in the words of Jesus. {Knew from the beginning} (\idei ex archs\). In the N.T. we have \ex archs\ only here and strkjv@16:4|, but \ap' archs\ in apparently the same sense as here in strkjv@15:27; strkjv@1John:2:7,24; strkjv@3:11| and see strkjv@Luke:1:2; strkjv@1John:1:1|. From the first Jesus distinguished between real trust in him and mere lip service (2:24; strkjv@8:31|), two senses of \pisteu\. {Were} (\eisin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse. {And who it was that should betray him} (\kai tis estin ho paradsn\). Same use of \estin\ and note article and future active participle of \paradidmi\, to hand over, to betray. John does not say here that Jesus knew that Judas would betray him when he chose him as one of the twelve, least of all that he chose him for that purpose. What he does say is that Jesus was not taken by surprise and soon saw signs of treason in Judas. The same verb is used of John's arrest in strkjv@Matthew:4:12|. Once Judas is termed traitor (\prodots\) in strkjv@Luke:6:16|. Judas had gifts and was given his opportunity. He did not have to betray Jesus.

rwp@John:7:19 @{And yet} (\kai\). Clear use of \kai\ in the adversative sense of "and yet" or "but." They marvelled at Christ's "ignorance" and boasted of their own knowledge of the law of Moses. And yet they violated that law by not practising it. {Why seek ye to kill me?} (\Ti me zteite apokteinai;\). A sudden and startling question as an illustration of their failure to do the law of Moses. Jesus had previously known (5:39,45-47|) that the Jews really rejected the teaching of Moses while professing to believe it. On that very occasion they had sought to kill him (5:18|), the very language used here. Apparently he had not been to Jerusalem since then. He undoubtedly alludes to their conduct then and charges them with the same purpose now.

rwp@John:7:35 @{Among themselves} (\pros heautous\). These Jewish leaders of verse 32| talk among themselves about what Jesus said in a spirit of contempt (this man or fellow, \houtos\). {That} (\hoti\). Almost result like \hoti\ in strkjv@Matthew:8:27|. {Will he go?} (\m mellei poreuesthai;\). Negative answer expected in an ironical question, "Is he about to go?" {Unto the Dispersion among the Greeks} (\eis tn diasporan tn Hellnn\). Objective genitive \tn Hellnn\ (of the Greeks) translated here "among," because it is the Dispersion of Jews among the Greeks. \Diaspora\ is from \diaspeir\, to scatter apart (Acts:8:1,4|). It occurs in Plutarch and is common in the LXX, in the N.T. only here, strkjv@James:1:1; strkjv@1Peter:1:1|. There were millions of these scattered Jews. {And teach the Greeks} (\kai didaskein tous Hellnas\). Confessing his failure to teach the Jews in Palestine, "thus ignorantly anticipating the course Christianity took; what seemed unlikely and impossible to them became actual" (Dods).

rwp@John:7:45 @{Why did ye not bring him?} (\Dia ti ouk gagete auton;\). Second aorist active indicative of \ag\. Indignant outburst of the Sanhedrin (both Sadducees and Pharisees) at the failure of the (\tous\, note article here referring to verse 32|) temple police to arrest Jesus. "Apparently they were sitting in expectation of immediately questioning him" (Dods). They were stunned at this outcome.

rwp@John:8:42 @{Ye would love me} (\gapate an eme\). Conclusion of second-class condition with distinct implication that their failure to love Jesus is proof that God is not their Father (protasis). {For I came forth from God} (\eg gar ek tou theou exlthon\). Second aorist active indicative of \exerchomai\, definite historical event (the Incarnation). See strkjv@4:30| for \exlthon ek\. In strkjv@13:3; strkjv@16:30| Jesus is said to have come from (\apo\) God. The distinction is not to be pressed. Note the definite consciousness of pre-existence with God as in strkjv@17:5|. {And am come} (\kai hk\). Present active indicative with perfect sense in the verb stem (state of completion) before rise of the tense and here retained. "I am here," Jesus means. {Of myself} (\ap' emautou\). His coming was not self-initiated nor independent of the Father. "But he (\ekeinos\, emphatic demonstrative pronoun) sent me" and here I am.

rwp@John:9:20 @{We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind} (\Oidamen hoti houtos estin ho huios hmn kai hoti tuphlos egennth\). These two questions the parents answer clearly and thus cut the ground from under the disbelief of these Pharisees as to the fact of the cure (verse 18|). Songs:these Pharisees made a failure here.

rwp@John:12:16 @{Understood not} (\ouk egnsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\. Another comment by John concerning the failure of the disciples to know what was happening (cf. strkjv@2:22; strkjv@7:39|). {At the first} (\to prton\). Adverbial accusative, as in strkjv@10:40; strkjv@19:39|. {Was glorified} (\edoxasth\). First aorist passive indicative of \doxaz\, to glorify, used of his death already in strkjv@7:39| and by Jesus himself of his death, resurrection, and ascension in strkjv@12:23; strkjv@13:31|. {Then remembered they} (\tote emnsthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \mimnsk\. It was easier to understand then and they had the Holy Spirit to help them (16:13-15|). {Were written of him} (\n ep' auti gegrammena\). Periphrastic past perfect passive of \graph\ with neuter plural participle agreeing with \tauta\ (these things) and singular verb, though the plural \san\ could have been used. Note the threefold repetition of \tauta\ in this verse, "clumsy" Bernard calls it, but making for clarity. The use of \ep' auti\ for "of him" rather than \peri autou\ is unusual, but occurs in strkjv@Revelation:10:11; strkjv@22:16|. {They had done} (\epoisan\). First aorist active indicative of \poie\, simply, "they did."

rwp@John:12:19 @{The Pharisees therefore laid among themselves} (\hoi oun Pharisaioi eipan pros heautous\). Graphic picture of the predicament of the Pharisees standing off and watching the enthusiastic crowds sweep by. As people usually do, they blame each other for the defeat of their plots against Jesus and for his final victory, as it seemed. {Behold how ye prevail nothing} (\thereite hoti ouk pheleite ouden\). It was a pathetic confession of failure because the rest of the plotters had bungled the whole thing. "Ye help nothing at all" by your plots and plans. {Lo, the world is gone after him} (\ide ho kosmos opis autou aplthen\). Exclamatory use of \ide\ and timeless aorist active indicative of \aperchomai\. The "world" is a bunch of fools, they feel, but see for yourselves. And the Sanhedrin had advertised to "find" Jesus! They can find him now!

rwp@Luke:1:1 @{Forasmuch as} (\epeidper\). Here alone in the N.T., though common in literary Attic. Appears in the papyri. A triple compound (\epei\ = since, \d\ = admittedly true, \per\ = intensive particle to emphasize importance). {Many} (\polloi\). How many no one knows, but certainly more than two or three. We know that Luke used the Logia of Jesus written by Matthew in Aramaic (Papias) and Mark's Gospel. Undoubtedly he had other written sources. {Have taken in hand} (\epecheirsan\). A literal translation of \epicheire\ (from \cheir\, hand and \epi\, upon). Both Hippocrates and Galen use this word in their introduction to their medical works. Here only in the N.T., though a common literary word. Common in the papyri for undertaking with no idea of failure or blame. Luke does not mean to cast reflection on those who preceded him. The apocryphal gospels were all much later and are not in his mind. Luke had secured fuller information and planned a book on a larger scale and did surpass them with the result that they all perished save Mark's Gospel and what Matthew and Luke possess of the Logia of Jesus. There was still room for Luke's book. That motive influences every author and thus progress is made. {To draw up, a narrative} (\anataxasthai digsin\). Ingressive aorist middle infinitive. This verb \anataxasthai\ has been found only in Plutarch's _Moral_. 968 CD about an elephant "rehearsing" by moonlight certain tricks it had been taught (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). That was from memory going regularly through the thing again. But the idea in the word is plain enough. The word is composed of \tass\, a common verb for arranging things in proper order and \ana\, again. Luke means to say that those before him had made attempts to rehearse in orderly fashion various matters about Christ. "The expression points to a connected series of narratives in some order (\taxis\), topical or chronological rather than to isolated narratives" (Bruce). "They had produced something more than mere notes or anecdotes" (Plummer). \Digsis\ means leading or carrying a thing through, not a mere incident. Galen applies this word some seventy-five times to the writing of Hippocrates. {Which have been fulfilled} (\tn peplrphormenn\). Perfect passive participle from \plrophore\ and that from \plrs\ (full) and \pher\ (to bring). Hence to bring or make full. The verb is rare outside of the LXX and the N.T. Papyri examples occur for finishing off a legal matter or a financial matter in full. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 86f.) gives examples from the papyri and inscriptions for completing a task or being convinced or satisfied in mind. The same ambiguity occurs here. When used of persons in the N.T. the meaning is to be convinced, or fully persuaded (Romans:4:21; strkjv@14:5; strkjv@Hebrews:6:11; strkjv@10:22|). When used of things it has the notion of completing or finishing (2Timothy:4:5,17|). Luke is here speaking of "matters" (\pragmatn\). Luke may refer to the matters connected with Christ's life which have been brought to a close among us or accomplished. Bruce argues plausibly that he means fulness of knowledge "concerning the things which have become widely known among us Christians." In strkjv@Colossians:2:2| we have "fulness of understanding" (\ts plrophorias ts suneses\). In modern Greek the verb means to inform. The careful language of Luke here really pays a tribute to those who had preceded him in their narratives concerning Christ.

rwp@Luke:7:38 @{Standing behind at his feet} (\stsa opis para tous podas autou\). Second aorist active participle from \histmi\ and intransitive, first aorist \estsa\ being transitive. The guest removed his sandals before the meal and he reclined on the left side with the feet outward. She was standing beside (\para\) his feet {weeping} (\klaiousa\). She was drawn irresistibly by gratitude to Jesus and is overcome with emotion before she can use the ointment; her tears (\tois dakrusin\, instrumental case of \dakru\) take the place of the ointment. {Wiped them with the hair of her head} (\tais thrixin ts kephals auts exemassen\). Inchoative imperfect of an old verb \ekmass\, to rub out or off, began to wipe off, an act of impulse evidently and of embarrassment. "Among the Jews it was a shameful thing for a woman to let down her hair in public; but she makes this sacrifice" (Plummer). Songs:Mary of Bethany wiped the feet of Jesus with her hair (John:12:3|) with a similar sacrifice out of her great love for Jesus. This fact is relied on by some to prove that Mary of Bethany had been a woman of bad character, surely an utter failure to recognize Mary's motive and act. {Kissed} (\katephilei\). Imperfect active of \kataphile\, to kiss repeatedly (force of \kata\), and accented by the tense of continued action here. The word in the N.T. occurs here, of the prodigal's father (15:20|), of the kiss of Judas (Mark:14:45; strkjv@Matthew:26:49|), of the Ephesian elders (Acts:20:37|). " Kissing the feet was a common mark of deep reverence, especially to leading rabbis" (Plummer). {Anointed them with the ointment} (\leiphen ti muri\). Imperfect active again of \aleiph\, a very common verb. \Chri\ has a more religious sense. The anointing came after the burst of emotional excitement.

rwp@Luke:8:12 @{Those by the wayside} (\hoi para tn hodon\). As in strkjv@Mark:4:15; strkjv@Matthew:13:19| so here the people who hear the word = the seed are discussed by metonymy. {The devil} (\ho diabolos\). The slanderer. Here strkjv@Mark:4:15| has Satan. {From their heart} (\apo ts kardias autn\). Here Mark has "in them." It is the devil's business to snatch up the seed from the heart before it sprouts and takes root. Every preacher knows how successful the devil is with his auditors. strkjv@Matthew:13:19| has it "sown in the heart." {That they may not believe and be saved} (\hina m pisteusantes sthsin\). Peculiar to Luke. Negative purpose with aorist active participle and first aorist (ingressive) passive subjunctive. Many reasons are offered today for the failure of preachers to win souls. Here is the main one, the activity of the devil during and after the preaching of the sermon. No wonder then that the sower must have good seed and sow wisely, for even then he can only win partial success.

rwp@Luke:16:11 @{Faithful in the unrighteous mammon} (\en ti adiki mamni\). In the use of what is considered "unrighteous" as it so often is. Condition of the first class, "if ye did not prove to be" (\ei ouk egenesthe\). Failure here forfeits confidence in "the true riches" (\to althinon\). There is no sadder story than to see a preacher go down by the wrong use of money, caught in this snare of the devil.

rwp@Mark:6:52 @{For they understood not} (\ou gar sunkan\). Explanation of their excessive amazement, viz., their failure to grasp the full significance of the miracle of the loaves and fishes, a nature miracle. Here was another, Jesus walking on the water. Their reasoning process (\kardia\ in the general sense for all the inner man) {was hardened} (\n peprmen\). See on ¯3:5| about \prsis\. Today some men have such intellectual hardness or denseness that they cannot believe that God can or would work miracles, least of all nature miracles.

rwp@Mark:9:14 @{And scribes questioning with them} (\kai grammateis sunztountes pros autous\). Mark alone gives this item. He is much fuller on this incident (9:14-29|) than either Matthew (Matthew:17:14-20|) or Luke (Luke:9:37-43|). It was just like the professional scribes to take keen interest in the failure of the nine disciples to cure this poor boy. They gleefully nagged and quizzed them. Jesus and the three find them at it when they arrive in the plain.

rwp@Mark:9:22 @{But if thou canst} (\all 'ei ti duni\). Jesus had asked (verse 21|) the history of the case like a modern physician. The father gave it and added further pathetic details about the fire and the water. The failure of the disciples had not wholly destroyed his faith in the power of Jesus, though the conditional form (first class, assuming it to be true) does suggest doubt whether the boy can be cured at all. It was a chronic and desperate case of epilepsy with the demon possession added. {Help us} (\boethson hemin\). Ingressive aorist imperative. Do it now. With touching tenderness he makes the boy's case his own as the Syrophoenician woman had said, "Have mercy on me" (Matthew:15:21|). The leper had said: "If thou wilt" (Mark:1:40|). This father says: "If thou canst."

rwp@Mark:9:28 @{Privately, saying} (\kat' idian hoti\). Indoors the nine disciples seek an explanation for their colossal failure. They had cast out demons and wrought cures before. The Revisers are here puzzled over Mark's use of \hoti\ as an interrogative particle meaning {why} where strkjv@Matthew:17:19| has \dia ti\. Some of the manuscripts have \dia ti\ here in strkjv@Mark:9:28| as all do in strkjv@Matthew:17:19|. See also strkjv@Mark:2:16| and strkjv@9:11|. It is probable that in these examples \hoti\ really means {why}. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 730. The use of \hos\ as interrogative "is by no means rare in the late Greek" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 126).

rwp@Mark:9:29 @{Save by prayer} (\ei m en proseuchi\). The addition of "and of fasting" does not appear in the two best Greek manuscripts (Aleph and B). It is clearly a late addition to help explain the failure. But it is needless and also untrue. Prayer is what the nine had failed to use. They were powerless because they were prayerless. Their self-complacency spelled defeat. strkjv@Matthew:17:20| has "because of your little faith" (\oligopistian\). That is true also. They had too much faith in themselves, too little in Christ. "They had trusted to the semi-magical power with which they thought themselves invested" (Swete). "Spirits of such malignity were quick to discern the lack of moral power and would yield to no other" (_ibid_.).

rwp@Mark:12:37 @{The common people heard him gladly} (\ho polus ochlos kouen autou hedes\). Literally, the much multitude (the huge crowd) was listening (imperfect tense) to him gladly. Mark alone has this item. The Sanhedrin had begun the formal attack that morning to destroy the influence of Jesus with the crowds whose hero he now was since the Triumphal Entry. It had been a colossal failure. The crowds were drawn closer to him than before.

rwp@Mark:14:41 @{It is enough} (\apechei\). Alone in Mark. This impersonal use is rare and has puzzled expositors no little. The papyri (Deissmann's _Light from the Ancient East_ and Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) furnish many examples of it as a receipt for payment in full. See also strkjv@Matthew:6:2ff.; strkjv@Luke:6:24; strkjv@Phillipians:4:18| for the notion of paying in full. It is used here by Jesus in an ironical sense, probably meaning that there was no need of further reproof of the disciples for their failure to watch with him. "This is no time for a lengthened exposure of the faults of friends; the enemy is at the gate" (Swete). See further on ¯Matthew:26:45| for the approach of Judas.

rwp@Matthew:6:24 @{No man can serve two masters} (\oudeis dunatai dusi kuriois douleuein\). Many try it, but failure awaits them all. Men even try "to be slaves to God and mammon" (\Thei douleuein kai mamni\). Mammon is a Chaldee, Syriac, and Punic word like _Plutus_ for the money-god (or devil). The slave of mammon will obey mammon while pretending to obey God. The United States has had a terrible revelation of the power of the money-god in public life in the Sinclair-Fall-Teapot-Air-Dome-Oil case. When the guide is blind and leads the blind, both fall into the ditch. The man who cannot tell road from ditch sees falsely as Ruskin shows in _Modern Painters_. He will hold to one (\henos anthexetai\). The word means to line up face to face (\anti\) with one man and so against the other.

rwp@Matthew:23:15 @{Twofold more a son of hell than yourselves} (\huion geenns diploteron hmn\). It is a convert to Pharisaism rather than Judaism that is meant by "one proselyte" (\hena prosluton\), from \proserchomai\, newcomers, aliens. There were two kinds of proselytes: of the gate (not actual Jews, but God-fearers and well-wishers of Judaism, like Cornelius), of righteousness who received circumcision and became actual Jews. But a very small per cent of the latter became Pharisees. There was a Hellenistic Jewish literature (Philo, Sibylline Oracles, etc.) designed to attract Gentiles to Judaism. But the Pharisaic missionary zeal (compass, \periagte\, go around) was a comparative failure. And success was even worse, Jesus says with pitiless plainness. The "son of Gehenna" means one fitted for and so destined for Gehenna. "The more converted the more perverted" (H.J. Holtzmann). The Pharisees claimed to be in a special sense sons of the kingdom (Matthew:8:12|). They were more partisan than pious. \Diplous\ (twofold, double) is common in the papyri. The comparative here used, as if from \diplos\, appears also in Appian. Note the ablative of comparison hmn. It was a withering thrust.

rwp@Matthew:26:41 @{Watch and pray} (\grgoreite kai proseuchesthe\). Jesus repeats the command of verse 38| with the addition of prayer and with the warning against the peril of temptation. He himself was feeling the worst of all temptations of his earthly life just then. He did not wish then to enter such temptation (\peirasmon\, here in this sense, not mere trial). Thus we are to understand the prayer in strkjv@Matthew:6:13| about leading (being led) into temptation. Their failure was due to weakness of the flesh as is often the case. {Spirit} (\pneuma\) here is the moral life (\intellect, will, emotions\) as opposed to the flesh (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:31:3; strkjv@Romans:7:25|). {Except I drink it} (\ean m auto pi\). Condition of the third class undetermined, but with likelihood of determination, whereas {if this cannot pass away} (\ei ou dunatai touto parelthein\) is first-class condition, determined as fulfilled, assumed to be true. This delicate distinction accurately presents the real attitude of Jesus towards this subtle temptation.

rwp@Matthew:26:47 @{While he yet spake} (\eti autou lalountos\). It was an electric moment as Jesus faced Judas with his horde of helpers as if he turned to meet an army. {Let us go} (\agmen\), Jesus had said. And here he is. The eight at the gate seemed to have given no notice. Judas is described here as "one of the twelve" (\heis tn ddeka\) in all three Synoptic Gospels (Mark:14:43; strkjv@Matthew:26:47; strkjv@Luke:22:47|). The very horror of the thing is thus emphasized, that one of the chosen twelve apostles should do this dastardly deed. {A great multitude} (\ochlos polus\). The chief priests and Pharisees had furnished Judas a band of soldiers from the garrison in Antonia (John:18:3|) and the temple police (Luke:22:52|) with swords (knives) and staves (clubs) with a hired rabble who had lanterns also (John:18:3|) in spite of the full moon. Judas was taking no chances of failure for he well knew the strange power of Jesus.

rwp@Matthew:27:40 @{If thou art the Son of God} (\ei huios ei tou theou\). More exactly, "If thou art a son of God," the very language of the devil to Jesus (Matthew:4:3|) in the early temptations, now hurled at Jesus under the devil's prompting as he hung upon the Cross. There is allusion, of course, to the claim of Jesus under oath before the Sanhedrin "the Son of God" (\ho huios tou theou\) and a repetition of the misrepresentation of his words about the temple of his body. It is a pitiful picture of human depravity and failure in the presence of Christ dying for sinners.

rwp@Revelation:3:11 @{I come quickly} (\erchomai tachu\). As in strkjv@2:16; strkjv@22:7,12,20|. "The keynote of the book" (Beckwith). But allow the author's own meaning of "quickly." {Hold fast that which thou hast} (\kratei ho echeis\). Sort of motto for each church (2:25|). {That no one take} (\hina mdeis labi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \lamban\. Here to take away "thy crown" (2:10|) which will be thine if really won and not forfeited by failure (2Timothy:4:8|). In that case it will go to another (Matthew:25:28; strkjv@Romans:11:17f.|).

rwp@Revelation:12:11 @{They overcame him} (\autoi eniksan\). First aorist active indicative of \nika\, the verb used by Jesus of his own victory (John:16:33|) and about him (Revelation:3:21; strkjv@5:5|). "The victory of the martyrs marks the failure of Satan's endeavours" (Swete). {Because of the blood of the Lamb} (\dia to haima tou arniou\). As in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:6,9; strkjv@7:14|. The blood of Christ is here presented by \dia\ as the ground for the victory and not the means, as by \en\ in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:9|. Both ideas are true, but \dia\ with the accusative gives only the reason. The blood of Christ does cleanse us from sin (John:1:29; strkjv@1John:1:7|). Christ conquered Satan, and so makes our victory possible (Luke:11:21f.; strkjv@Hebrews:2:18|). "Thus the Lamb is the true \sungoros\ (like Michael) of the New Israel, its \parakltos pros ton patera\ (1John:2:1|)" (Swete). {Because of the Word of their testimony} (\dia ton logon ts marturias autn\). The same use of \dia\, "because of their testimony to Jesus" as in John's own case in strkjv@1:9|. These martyrs have been true to their part. {They loved not their life even unto death} (\ouk gapsan ten psuchn autn achri thanatou\). First aorist active indicative of \agapa\. They did resist "unto blood" (\mechris haimatos\ strkjv@Hebrews:12:4|) and did not put their own lives before loyalty to Christ. There is a direct reference to the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:12:25| as illustrated also in strkjv@Mark:8:35; strkjv@Matthew:10:39; strkjv@16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24; strkjv@17:33|. Paul's own example is pertinent (Acts:21:13; strkjv@Phillipians:1:20ff.|). Jesus himself had been "obedient unto death" (Phillipians:2:8|). These martyrs seem to be still alive on earth, but their heroism is proleptically pictured.

rwp@Romans:1:18 @{For the wrath of God is revealed} (\apokaluptetai gar org theou\). Note in Romans Paul's use of \gar\, now argumentative, now explanatory, now both as here. There is a parallel and antecedent revelation (see verse 17|) of God's wrath corresponding to the revelation of God's righteousness, this an unwritten revelation, but plainly made known. \Org\ is from \orga\, to teem, to swell. It is the temper of God towards sin, not rage, but the wrath of reason and law (Shedd). The revelation of God's righteousness in the gospel was necessary because of the failure of men to attain it without it, for God's wrath justly rested upon all both Gentiles (1:18-32|) and Jews (2:1-3:20|). {Ungodliness} (\asebeian\). Irreligion, want of reverence toward God, old word (cf. strkjv@2Timothy:2:16|). {Unrighteousness} (\adikian\). Lack (\a\ privative and \dik\) of right conduct toward men, injustice (Romans:9:14; strkjv@Luke:18:6|). This follows naturally from irreverence. The basis of ethical conduct rests on the nature of God and our attitude toward him, otherwise the law of the jungle (cf. Nietzsche, "might makes right"). {Hold down the truth} (\tn altheian katechontn\). Truth (\altheia, alths\, from \a\ privative and \lth\ or \lanthan\, to conceal) is out in the open, but wicked men, so to speak, put it in a box and sit on the lid and "hold it down in unrighteousness." Their evil deeds conceal the open truth of God from men. Cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:6f.| for this use of \katech\, to hinder.

rwp@Romans:1:21 @{Because that} (\dioti\). As in verse 19|. {Knowing God} (\gnontes ton theon\). Second aorist active participle of \ginsk\, to know by personal experience. Definite statement that originally men had some knowledge of God. No people, however degraded, have yet been found without some yearning after a god, a seeking to find the true God and get back to him as Paul said in Athens (Acts:17:27|). {Glorified not as God} (\ouch hs theon edoxasan\). They knew more than they did. This is the reason for the condemnation of the heathen (2:12-16|), the failure to do what they know. {Their senseless heart} (\h asunetos autn kardia\). \Kardia\ is the most comprehensive term for all our faculties whether feeling (Romans:9:2|), will (1Corinthians:4:5|), intellect (Romans:10:6|). It may be the home of the Holy Spirit (Romans:5:5|) or of evil desires (1:24|). See strkjv@Mark:7:21f.| for list of vices that come "out of the heart." \Asunetos\ is a verbal adjective from \sunimi\, to put together, and \a\ privative, unintelligent, not able to put together the manifest evidence about God (verse 20|). Songs:darkness settled down on their hearts (\eskotisth\, first aorist ingressive passive of \skotiz\, to darken).

rwp@Romans:2:1 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). See strkjv@1:24,26| for this relative conjunction, "because of which thing." {Without excuse} (\anapologtos\). See on ¯1:21|. {Whosoever thou art that judgest} (\pas ho krinn\). Literally, "every one that judgest," vocative case in apposition with \anthrpe\. Paul begins his discussion of the failure of the Jew to attain to the God-kind of righteousness (2:1-3:20|) with a general statement applicable to all as he did (1:18|) in the discussion of the failure of the Gentiles (Lightfoot). The Gentile is readily condemned by the Jew when he sins and equally so is the Jew condemned by the Gentile in like case. \Krin\ does not of itself mean to condemn, but to pick out, separate, approve, determine, pronounce judgment, condemn (if proper). {Another} (\ton heteron\). Literally, "the other man." The notion of two in the word, one criticizing the other. {Thou condemnest thyself} (\seauton katakrineis\). Note \kata\ here with \krin\, to make plain the adverse judgment. {For} (\gar\). Explanatory reason for the preceding statement. The critic {practises} (\prasseis\, not single acts \poie\, but the habit \prass\) the same things that he condemns.

rwp@Romans:11:7 @{What then?} (\ti oun?\). Since God did not push Israel away (verse 1|), what is true? {The election} (\h eklog\). Abstract for concrete (the elect). {Obtained} (\epetuchen\). Second aorist active indicative of \epitugchan\, old verb, to hit upon, only here in Paul. See strkjv@9:30-33| for the failure of the Jews. {Were hardened} (\eprthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \pro\, late verb, to cover with thick skin (\pros\). See on strkjv@2Corinthians:3:14; strkjv@Mark:3:5|.

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.