Bible:
Filter: String:

NONE.filter - rwp grammatical:

rwp@Info @ The six volumes will follow this order; Volume I, The Gospel according to Matthew and Mark; Vol. II, The Gospel according to Luke; Vol. III, The Acts of the Apostles; Vol. IV, The Pauline Epistles; Vol. V, The Gospel according to John and the Epistle to the Hebrews; Vol. VI, the general Epistles and the Revelation of John. For purely exegetical and expository development a more chronological order would be required. These volumes do not claim to be formal commentary. Nowhere is the whole text discussed, but everywhere those words are selected for discussion which seem to be richest for the needs of the reader in the light of present-day knowledge. A great deal of the personal equation is thus inevitable. My own remarks will be now lexical, now grammatical, now archaeological, now exegetical, now illustrative, anything that the mood of the moment may move me to write that may throw light here and there on the New Testament words and idioms. Another writer might feel disposed to enlarge upon items not touched upon here. But that is to be expected even in the more formal commentaries, useful as they are. To some extent it is true of lexicons. No one man knows everything, even in his chosen specialty, or has the wisdom to pick out what every reader wishes explained. But even diamonds in the rough are diamonds. It is for the reader to polish them as he will. He can turn the light this way and that. There is a certain amount of repetition at some points, part of it on purpose to save time and to emphasize the point.

rwp@1Corinthians:1:23 @{But we preach Christ crucified} (\hmeis de krussomen Christon estaurmenon\). Grammatically stated as a partial result (\de\) of the folly of both Jews and Greeks, actually in sharp contrast. We proclaim, "we do not discuss or dispute" (Lightfoot). Christ (Messiah) as crucified, as in strkjv@2:2; strkjv@Galatians:3:1|, "not a sign-shower nor a philosopher" (Vincent). Perfect passive participle of \stauro\. {Stumbling-block} (\skandalon\). Papyri examples mean trap or snare which here tripped the Jews who wanted a conquering Messiah with a world empire, not a condemned and crucified one (Matthew:27:42; strkjv@Luke:24:21|). {Foolishness} (\mrian\). Folly as shown by their conduct in Athens (Acts:17:32|).

rwp@1John:3:24 @{And he in him} (\kai autos en auti\). That is "God abides in him" as in strkjv@4:15|. We abide in God and God abides in us through the Holy Spirit (John:14:10,17,23; strkjv@17:21|). "Therefore let God be a home to thee, and be thou the home of God: abide in God, and let God abide in thee" (Bede). {By the Spirit} (\ek tou pneumatos\). It is thus (by the Holy Spirit, first mention in this Epistle and "Holy" not used with "Spirit" in this Epistle or the Apocalypse) that we know that God abides in us. {Which} (\hou\). Ablative case by attraction from accusative \ho\ (object of \edken\) to agree with \pneumatos\ as often, though not always. It is a pity that the grammatical gender (which) is retained here in the English instead of "whom," as it should be.

rwp@1John:4:3 @{Confesseth not} (\m homologei\). Indefinite relative clause with the subjective negative \m\ rather than the usual objective negative \ou\ (verse 6|). It is seen also in strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Titus:1:11|, a survival of the literary construction (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 171). The Vulgate (along with Irenaeus, Tertullian, Augustine) reads _solvit_ (\luei\) instead of \m homologei\, which means "separates Jesus," apparently an allusion to the Cerinthian heresy (distinction between Jesus and Christ) as the clause before refers to the Docetic heresy. Many MSS. have here also \en sarki elluthota\ repeated from preceding clause, but not A B Vg Cop. and not genuine. {The spirit of the antichrist} (\to tou antichristou\). \Pneuma\ (spirit) not expressed, but clearly implied by the neuter singular article to. It is a repetition of the point about antichrists made in strkjv@2:18-25|. {Whereof} (\ho\). Accusative of person (grammatical neuter referring to \pneuma\) with \akou\ along with accusative of the thing (\hoti erchetai\, as in strkjv@2:18|, futuristic present middle indicative). Here the perfect active indicative (\akkoate\), while in strkjv@2:18| the aorist (\kousate\). {And now already} (\kai nun d\). As in strkjv@2:18| also (many have come). "The prophecy had found fulfilment before the Church had looked for it" (Westcott). It is often so. For \d\ see strkjv@John:4:35; strkjv@9:27|.

rwp@1John:5:20 @{Is come} (\hkei\). Present active indicative, but the root has a perfect sense, "has come." See \exlthon kai hk\ in strkjv@John:8:42|. {An understanding} (\dianoian\). Here alone in John's writings, but in Paul (Ephesians:4:18|) and Peter (1Peter:1:13|). John does not use \gnsis\ (knowledge) and \nous\ (mind) only in strkjv@Revelation:13:18; strkjv@17:9|. {That we know} (\hina ginskomen\). Result clause with \hina\ and the present active indicative, as is common with \hina\ and the future indicative (John:7:3|). It is possible that here \o\ was pronounced \\ as a subjunctive, but many old MSS. have \hina ginskousin\ (plainly indicative) in strkjv@John:17:3|, and in many other places in the N.T. the present indicative with \hina\ occurs as a variant reading as in strkjv@John:5:20|. {Him that is true} (\ton althinon\). That is, God. Cf. strkjv@1:8|. {In him that is true} (\en ti althini\). In God in contrast with the world "in the evil one" (verse 19|). See strkjv@John:17:3|. {Even in his Son Jesus Christ} (\en ti huii autou Isou Christi\). The \autou\ refers clearly to \en ti althini\ (God). Hence this clause is not in apposition with the preceding, but an explanation as to how we are "in the True One" by being "in his Son Jesus Christ." {This} (\houtos\). Grammatically \houtos\ may refer to Jesus Christ or to "the True One." It is a bit tautological to refer it to God, but that is probably correct, God in Christ, at any rate. God is eternal life (John:5:26|) and he gives it to us through Christ.

rwp@1Peter:1:11 @{Searching} (\eraunntes\). Present active participle of \erauna\, late form for older \ereuna\ (both in the papyri), uncompounded verb (John:7:52|), the compound occurring in verse 10| above. {What time or what manner of time} (\eis tina poion kairon\). Proper sense of \poios\ (qualitative interrogative) kept here as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:35, strkjv@Romans:3:27|, though it is losing its distinctive sense from \tis\ (Acts:23:34|). The prophets knew what they prophesied, but not at what time the Messianic prophecies would be fulfilled. {The Spirit of Christ which was in them} (\to en autois pneuma Christou\). Peter definitely asserts here that the Spirit of Jesus Christ (the Messiah) was in the Old Testament prophets, the Holy Spirit called the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God (Romans:8:9|), who spoke to the prophets as he would speak to the apostles (John:16:14|). {Did point unto} (\edlou\). Imperfect active of \dlo\, to make plain, "did keep on pointing to," though they did not clearly perceive the time. {When it testified beforehand} (\promarturomenon\). Present middle participle of \promarturomai\, a late compound unknown elsewhere save in a writer of the fourteenth century (Theodorus Mech.) and now in a papyrus of the eighth. It is neuter here because \pneuma\ is neuter, but this grammatical gender should not be retained as "it" in English, but should be rendered "he" (and so as to strkjv@Acts:8:15|). Here we have predictive prophecy concerning the Messiah, though some modern critics fail to find predictions of the Messiah in the Old Testament. {The sufferings of Christ} (\ta eis Christon pathmata\). "The sufferings for (destined for) Christ" like the use of \eis\ in verse 10| (\eis humas\ for you). {The glories that should follow them} (\tas meta tauta doxas\). "The after these things (sufferings) glories." The plural of \doxa\ is rare, but occurs in strkjv@Exodus:15:11; strkjv@Hosea:9:11|. The glories of Christ followed the sufferings as in strkjv@4:13; strkjv@5:1,6|.

rwp@1Timothy:2:9 @{In like manner that women} (\hosauts gunaikas\). \Boulomai\ must be repeated from verse 8|, involved in \hosauts\ (old adverb, as in strkjv@Romans:8:26|). Parry insists that \proseuchomenas\ (when they pray) must be supplied also. Grammatically that is possible (Lock), but it is hardly consonant with verses 11-15| (White). {Adorn themselves} (\kosmein heautas\). Present active infinitive after \boulomai\ understood. Old word from \kosmos\ (arrangement, ornament, order, world). See strkjv@Luke:21:5; strkjv@Titus:2:10|. See strkjv@1Corinthians:11:5ff.| for Paul's discussion of women's dress in public worship. {In modest apparel} (\en katastoli kosmii\). \Katastol\ is a late word (a letting down, \katastell\, of demeanour or dress, arrangement of dress). Only here in N.T. \Kosmios\ is old adjective from \kosmos\ and means well-arranged, becoming. W. H. have adverb in margin (\kosmis\). {With shamefastness} (\meta aidous\). Old word for shame, reverence, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:28|. {Sobriety} (\sphrosuns\). Old word, in N.T. only here, verse 15|, and strkjv@Acts:26:15| (Paul also). {Not with braided hair} (\m en plegmasin\). Old word from \plek\, to plait, to braid, for nets, baskets, here only in N.T. Cf. strkjv@1Peter:3:1| (\emploks\). {And gold} (\en chrusii\). Locative case with \en\ repeated. Some MSS. read \chrusi\. Both used for gold ornaments. {Or pearls} (\ margaritais\). See strkjv@Matthew:7:6| for this word. {Or costly raiment} (\ himatismi polutelei\). \Himatismos\ a common _Koin_ word from \himatiz\, to clothe. \Polutels\, old word from \polus\ and \telos\ (great price). See strkjv@Mark:14:3|.

rwp@Info_2John @ SECOND JOHN ABOUT A.D. 85 TO 90 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There is little to add to what was said about the First Epistle except that here the author terms himself "the elder" (\ho presbuteros\) and writes to "the elect lady" (\eklekti kurii\). There is dispute about both of these titles. Some hold that it is the mythical "presbyter John" of whom Papias may speak, if so understood, but whose very existence is disproved by Dom Chapman in _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). Peter the apostle (1Peter:1:1|) calls himself "fellow-elder" (\sunpresbuteros\) with the other elders (1Peter:5:1|). The word referred originally to age (Luke:15:25|), then to rank or office as in the Sanhedrin (Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Acts:6:12|) and in the Christian churches (Acts:11:30; strkjv@20:17; strkjv@1Timothy:5:17,19|) as here also. A few even deny that the author is the same as in the First Epistle of John, but just an imitator. But the bulk of modern scholarly opinion agrees that the same man wrote all three Epistles and the Fourth Gospel (the Beloved Disciple, and many still say the Apostle John) whatever is true of the Apocalypse. There is no way of deciding whether "the elect lady" is a woman or a church. The obvious way of taking it is to a woman of distinction in one of the churches, as is true of "the co-elect lady in Babylon" (1Peter:5:13|), Peter's wife, who travelled with him (1Corinthians:9:5|). Some even take \kuria\ to be the name of the lady (Cyria). Some also take it to be "Eklecta the lady." Dr. Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 31) holds that Pergamum is the church to which the letter was sent. The same commentaries treat I, II, and III John as a rule, though Poggel has a book on II, III John (1896) and Bresky (1906) has _Das Verhaltnis des Zweiten Johannesbriefes zum dritten_. Dr. J. Rendel Harris has an interesting article in _The Expositor_ of London for March, 1901, on "The Problem of the Address to the Second Epistle of John," in which he argues from papyri examples that \kuria\ here means "my dear" or "my lady." But Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 26) argues that "the qualifying adjunct 'elect' lifts us into the region of Christian calling and dignity." It is not certain that II John was written after I John, though probable. Origen rejected it and the Peshitta Syriac does not have II and III John. strkjv@2John:1:1 @{And her children} (\kai tois teknois auts\). As with \eklekt kuria\, so here \tekna\ may be understood either literally as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:4|, or spiritually, as in strkjv@Galatians:4:19,25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:2|. For the spiritual sense in \teknia\ see strkjv@1John:2:1,12|. {Whom} (\hous\). Masculine accusative plural, though \teknois\ is neuter plural (dative), construction according to sense, not according to grammatical gender, "embracing the mother and the children of both sexes" (Vincent). See thus \hous\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:19|. {I} (\Eg\). Though \ho presbuteros\ is third person, he passes at once after the Greek idiom to the first and there is also special emphasis here in the use of \agap\ with the addition of \en altheii\ (in truth, in the highest sphere, as in strkjv@John:17:19; strkjv@3John:1:1|) and \ouk eg monos\ (not I only, "not I alone"). Brooke argues that this language is unsuitable if to a single family and not to a church. But Paul employs this very phrase in sending greetings to Prisca and Aquila (Romans:16:4|). {That know} (\hoi egnkotes\). Perfect active articular participle of \ginsk\, "those that have come to know and still know."

rwp@2Timothy:3:6 @{That creep} (\hoi endunontes\). Old and common verb (also \endu\) either to put on (1Thessalonians:5:8|) or to enter (to slip in by insinuation, as here). See same idea in strkjv@Jude:1:4| (\pareisedusan\), strkjv@2Peter:2:1| (\pareisaxousin\), strkjv@Galatians:2:4| (\pareislthon\ and \pareisaktous\). These stealthy "creepers" are pictured also in strkjv@Titus:1:11|. {Take captive} (\aichmaltizontes\). "Taking captive." Present active participle of \aichmaltiz\, for which see strkjv@2Corinthians:10:5; strkjv@Romans:7:23|. {Silly women} (\gunaikaria\). Literally, "little women" (diminutive of \gun\), found in Diocles (comedian of 5 century B.C.) and in Epictetus. The word here is neuter (grammatical gender) plural. Used contemptuously here (only N.T. example). Ramsay suggests "society ladies." It is amazing how gullible some women are with religious charlatans who pose as exponents of "new thought." {Laden with sins} (\sesreumena hamartiais\). Perfect passive participle of \sreu\, old word from Aristotle down (from \sros\, a heap) to heap up. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:12:20|. Associative instrumental case \hamartiais\. {Divers} (\poikilais\). Many coloured. See strkjv@Titus:3:3|. One has only to recall Schweinfurth, the false Messiah of forty odd years ago with his "heavenly harem" in Illinois and the recent infamous "House of David" in Michigan to understand how these Gnostic cults led women into licentiousness under the guise of religion or of liberty. The priestesses of Aphrodite and of Isis were illustrations ready to hand. \Agomena\ (present passive participle) means "continually led astray or from time to time."

rwp@2Timothy:3:16 @{Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable} (\psa graph theopneustos kai phelimos\). There are two matters of doubt in this clause. One is the absence of the article \h\ before \graph\, whether that makes it mean "every scripture" or "all scripture" as of necessity if present. Unfortunately, there are examples both ways with both \ps\ and \graph\. Twice we find \graph\ in the singular without the article and yet definite (1Peter:2:6; strkjv@2Peter:1:20|). We have \ps Isral\ (Romans:11:26|) for all Israel (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 772). Songs:far as the grammatical usage goes, one can render here either "all scripture" or "every scripture." There is no copula (\estin\) in the Greek and so one has to insert it either before the \kai\ or after it. If before, as is more natural, then the meaning is: "All scripture (or every scripture) is inspired of God and profitable." In this form there is a definite assertion of inspiration. That can be true also of the second way, making "inspired of God" descriptive of "every scripture," and putting \estin\ (is) after \kai\: "All scripture (or every scripture), inspired of God, is also profitable." {Inspired of God} (\theopneustos\). "God-breathed." Late word (Plutarch) here only in N.T. Perhaps in contrast to the commandments of men in strkjv@Titus:1:14|. {Profitable} (\phelimos\). See strkjv@1Timothy:4:8|. See strkjv@Romans:15:4|. Four examples of \pros\ (facing, with a view to, for): \didaskalian\, teaching; \elegmon\, reproof, in LXX and here only in N.T.; \epanorthsin\, correction, old word, from \epanortho\, to set up straight in addition, here only in N.T., with which compare \epidiortho\ in strkjv@Titus:1:5|; \paideian\, instruction, with which compare strkjv@Ephesians:6:4|.

rwp@Acts:8:16 @{He was fallen} (\n epipeptkos\). Periphrastic past perfect active of \epipipt\, old verb. The participle is neuter here because of the grammatical gender of \pneuma\, but the translation should be "he" (natural gender), not "it." We should not use "it" for the Holy Spirit. {Only they had been baptized} (\monon de babaptismenoi huprchon\). Periphrastic past perfect passive of \baptiz\ with \huparch\ (see verse 9| \prouprchon\), instead of \san\. {Into the name} (\eis to onoma\). Better, in the name (see on ¯2:38|).

rwp@Acts:13:36 @{His own generation} (\idii genei\). Either locative case, "in his own generation" or dative object of \hupretsas\ (served). {The counsel of God} (\ti tou theou bouli\). Songs:here, either the dative, the object of \hupretsas\ if \genei\ is locative, or the instrumental case "by the counsel of God" which again may be construed either with \hupretsas\ (having served) or after \ekoimth\ (fell on sleep). Either of the three ways is grammatical and makes good sense. \Koimaomai\ for death we have already had (Acts:7:60|). Songs:Jesus (John:11:11|) and Paul (1Corinthians:15:6,51|). {Was laid} (\proseteth\). Was added unto (first aorist passive indicative of \prostithmi\). See the verb in strkjv@2:47; strkjv@5:14|. This figure for death probably arose from the custom of burying families together (Genesis:15:15; strkjv@Judges:2:10|). {Saw corruption} (\eiden diaphthoran\). As Jesus did not (Acts:2:31|) as he shows in verse 37|.

rwp@Colossians:1:27 @{God was pleased} (\thelsen ho theos\). First aorist active indicative of \thel\, to will, to wish. "God willed" this change from hidden mystery to manifestation. {To make known} (\gnrisai\). First aorist active infinitive of \gnriz\ (from \ginsk\). Among the Gentiles (\en tois ethnesin\). This is the crowning wonder to Paul that God had included the Gentiles in his redemptive grace, "the riches of the glory of this mystery" (\to ploutos ts doxs tou mustriou toutou\) and that Paul himself has been made the minister of this grace among the Gentiles (Ephesians:3:1-2|). He feels the high honour keenly and meets the responsibility humbly. {Which} (\ho\). Grammatical gender (neuter) agreeing with \mustriou\ (mystery), supported by A B P Vulg., though \hos\ (who) agreeing with \Christos\ in the predicate is read by Aleph C D L. At any rate the idea is simply that the personal aspect of "this mystery" is "Christ in you the hope of glory" (\Christos en humin h elpis ts doxs\). He is addressing Gentiles, but the idea of \en\ here is in, not among. It is the personal experience and presence of Christ in the individual life of all believers that Paul has in mind, the indwelling Christ in the heart as in strkjv@Ephesians:3:17|. He constitutes also the hope of glory for he is the \Shekinah\ of God. Christ is our hope now (1Timothy:1:1|) and the consummation will come (Romans:8:18|).

rwp@Ephesians:4:4 @{One body} (\hen sma\). One mystical body of Christ (the spiritual church or kingdom, cf. strkjv@1:23; strkjv@2:16|). {One Spirit} (\hen pneuma\). One Holy Spirit, grammatical neuter gender (not to be referred to by "it," but by "he"). {In one hope} (\en mii elpidi\). The same hope as a result of their calling for both Jew and Greek as shown in chapter 2|.

rwp@Galatians:4:6 @{Because ye are sons} (\hoti este huioi\). This is the reason for sending forth the Son (4:4| and here). We were "sons" in God's elective purpose and love. \Hoti\ is causal (1Corinthians:12:15; strkjv@Romans:9:7|). {The Spirit of his Son} (\to pneuma tou huioi autou\). The Holy Spirit, called the Spirit of Christ (Romans:8:9f.|), the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:19|). The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son (John:15:26|). {Crying, Abba, Father} (\krazon Abba ho patr\). The participle agrees with \pneuma\ neuter (grammatical gender), not neuter in fact. An old, though rare in present as here, onomatopoetic word to croak as a raven (Theophrastus, like Poe's _The Raven_), any inarticulate cry like "the unuttered groanings" of strkjv@Romans:8:26| which God understands. This cry comes from the Spirit of Christ in our hearts. \Abba\ is the Aramaic word for father with the article and \ho patr\ translates it. The articular form occurs in the vocative as in strkjv@John:20:28|. It is possible that the repetition here and in strkjv@Romans:8:15| may be "a sort of affectionate fondness for the very term that Jesus himself used" (Burton) in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark:14:36|). The rabbis preserve similar parallels. Most of the Jews knew both Greek and Aramaic. But there remains the question why Jesus used both in his prayer. Was it not natural for both words to come to him in his hour of agony as in his childhood? The same thing may be true here in Paul's case.

rwp@Info_John @ BUT DIFFERENT FROM THE APOCALYPSE It should be said at once that the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel does not depend on that of the Apocalypse. In fact, some men hold to the Johannine authorship of the Apocalypse who deny that of the Gospel while some hold directly the opposite view. Some deny the Johannine authorship of both Gospel and Apocalypse, while the majority hold to the Johannine authorship of Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse as was the general rule till after the time of Origen. The author of the Apocalypse claims to be John (Revelation:1:4,9; strkjv@22:8|), though what John he does not say. Denial of the existence of a "Presbyter John" naturally leads one to think of the Apostle John. Origen says that John, the brother of James, was banished to the Isle of Patmos where he saw the Apocalypse. There is undoubted radical difference in language between the Apocalypse and the other Johannine books which will receive discussion when the Apocalypse is reached. Westcott explained these differences as due to the early date of the Apocalypse in the reign of Vespasian before John had become master of the Greek language. Even J. H. Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 9, note 4) says bluntly: "If its date was 95 A.D., the author cannot have written the fourth Gospel only a short time after." Or before, he would say. But the date of the Apocalypse seems definitely to belong to the reign of Domitian. Songs:one ventures to call attention to the statement in strkjv@Acts:4:13| where Peter and John are described as \agrammatoi kai iditai\ (unlettered and private or unschooled men). It is curious also that it is precisely in 2Peter and the Apocalypse that we have so many grammatical solecisms and peculiarities. We know that the Fourth Gospel was reviewed by a group of John's friends in Ephesus, while he was apparently alone in the Isle of Patmos. The excitement of the visions would naturally increase the uncouth vernacular of the Apocalypse so much like that in the Greek papyri as seen in Milligan's _Greek Papyri_, for instance. This being true, one is able, in spite of Moulton's dictum, to hold to the Johannine authorship of both Gospel and Apocalypse and not far apart in date.

rwp@John:7:39 @{Which} (\hou\). Genitive by attraction of the relative \ho\ (accusative singular object of \lambanein\) to the case of \tou pneumatos\ (the Spirit) the antecedent. But it is purely grammatical gender (neuter \ho\ because of \pneuma\) which we do not have in English. Even here one should say "whom," not which, of the Spirit of God. {Were to receive} (\emellon lambanein\). Imperfect active of \mell\ with the present active infinitive \lambanein\, to receive, one of the three constructions with \mell\ (present, aorist, or future infinitive). Literally, "whom they were about to receive," a clear reference to the great pentecost. {For the Spirit was not yet given} (\oup gar n pneuma\). No verb for "given" in the Greek. The reference is not to the existence of the Spirit, but to the dispensation of the Spirit. This same use of \eimi\ like \pareimi\ (to be present) appears in strkjv@Acts:19:2| of the Spirit's activity. John, writing at the close of the century, inserts this comment and interpretation of the language of Jesus as an allusion to the coming of the Holy Spirit at pentecost (the Promise of the Father). {Because Jesus was not yet glorified} (\hoti Isous oup edoxasth\). Reason for the previous statement, the pentecostal outpouring following the death of Jesus here called "glorified" (\edoxasth\, first aorist passive indicative of \doxaz\), used later of the death of Jesus (12:16|), even by Jesus himself (12:23; strkjv@13:31|).

rwp@John:14:17 @{The Spirit of truth} (\to pneuma ts altheias\). Same phrase in strkjv@15:27; strkjv@16:13; strkjv@1John:4:6|, "a most exquisite title" (Bengel). The Holy Spirit is marked by it (genitive case), gives it, defends it (cf. strkjv@1:17|), in contrast to the spirit of error (1John:4:6|). {Whom} (\ho\). Grammatical neuter gender (\ho\) agreeing with \pneuma\ (grammatical), but rightly rendered in English by "whom" and note masculine \ekeinos\ (verse 26|). He is a person, not a mere influence. {Cannot receive} (\ou dunatai labein\). Left to itself the sinful world is helpless (1Corinthians:2:14; strkjv@Romans:8:7f.|), almost Paul's very language on this point. The world lacks spiritual insight (\ou therei\) and spiritual knowledge (\oude ginskei\). It failed to recognize Jesus (1:10|) and likewise the Holy Spirit. {Ye know him} (\humeis ginskete auto\). Emphatic position of \humeis\ (ye) in contrast with the world (15:19|), because they have seen Jesus the Revealer of the Father (verse 9|). {Abides} (\menei\). Timeless present tense. {With you} (\par' humin\). "By your side," "at home with you," not merely "with you" (\meth' humn\) "in the midst of you." {In you} (\en humin\). In your hearts. Songs:note \meta\ (16|), \para, en\.

rwp@John:14:26 @{Whom} (\ho\). Grammatical neuter, but "whom" is correct translation. The Father will send the Holy Spirit (14:16; strkjv@Luke:24:49; strkjv@Acts:2:33|), but so will the Son (John:15:26; strkjv@16:7|) as Jesus breathes the Holy Spirit upon the disciples (20:22|). There is no contradiction in this relation of the Persons in the Trinity (the Procession of the Holy Spirit). Here the Holy Spirit (full title as in strkjv@Mark:3:29; strkjv@Matthew:12:32; strkjv@Luke:12:10|) is identified with the Paraclete. {He} (\ekeinos\). Emphatic demonstrative pronoun and masculine like \parakltos\. {Shall teach you all things} (\humas didaxei panta\). The Holy Spirit knows "the deep things of God" (1Corinthians:2:10|) and he is our Teacher in the Dispensation of the Holy Spirit of both new truth (verse 25|) and old. {Bring to your remembrance} (\hupomnsei humas\). Future active indicative of \hupomimnsk\, old verb to remind, to recall, here only in this Gospel (cf. strkjv@3John:1:10; strkjv@2Timothy:2:14|) and with two accusatives (person and thing). After pentecost the disciples will be able better to recall and to understand what Jesus had said (how dull they had been at times) and to be open to new revelations from God (cf. Peter at Joppa and Caesarea).

rwp@John:15:26 @{When the Comforter is come} (\hotan elthi ho parakltos\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\, "whenever the Comforter comes." {Whom I will send unto you from the Father} (\hon eg pemps humin para tou patros\). As in strkjv@16:7|, but in strkjv@14:16,26| the Father sends at the request of or in the name of Jesus. Cf. strkjv@Luke:24:49; strkjv@Acts:2:33|. This is the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son. {Which} (\ho\). Grammatical neuter to agree with \pneuma\, and should be rendered "who" like \ho\ in strkjv@14:26|. {Proceedeth from the Father} (\para tou patros ekporeuetai\). "From beside the Father" as in the preceding clause. {He} (\ekeinos\). Emphatic masculine pronoun, not neuter (\ekeino\) though following \ho\. {Shall bear witness of me} (\martursei peri emou\). Future active of \marture\. This is the mission of the Paraclete (16:14|) as it should be ours.

rwp@Revelation:1:8 @{The Alpha and the Omega} (\to Alpha kai to O\). The first and the last letters of the Greek alphabet, each with its own neuter (grammatical gender) article. This description of the eternity of God recurs in strkjv@21:6| with the added explanation \h arch kai to telos\ (the Beginning and the End) and of Christ in strkjv@22:13| with the still further explanation \ho prtos kai ho eschatos\ (the First and the Last). This last phrase appears also in strkjv@1:17; strkjv@2:8| without \to Alpha kai to O\. The change of speaker here is unannounced, as in strkjv@16:15; strkjv@18:20|. Only here and strkjv@21:5f|. is God introduced as the speaker. The eternity of God guarantees the prophecy just made. {The Lord God} (\Kurios ho theos\). "The Lord the God." Common phrase in Ezekiel (Ezekiel:6:3,11; strkjv@7:2|, etc.) and in this book (4:8; strkjv@11:17; strkjv@15:3; strkjv@16:7; strkjv@19:6; strkjv@21:22|). See strkjv@1:4; strkjv@4:8| for the triple use of \ho\, etc. to express the eternity of God. {The Almighty} (\ho pantokratr\). Late compound (\ps\ and \krate\), in Cretan inscription and a legal papyrus, common in LXX and Christian papyri, in N.T. only in strkjv@2Corinthians:6:18| (from strkjv@Jeremiah:38:35|) and strkjv@Revelation:1:8; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@11:17; strkjv@15:3; strkjv@16:7,14; strkjv@19:6,15; strkjv@21:22|.

rwp@Revelation:5:6 @{And I saw} (\kai eidon\). Stirred by the words of the elder in verse 5| (\idou\, behold). "I beheld." {In the midst} (\en mesi\). See strkjv@4:6| for this idiom. It is not quite clear where the Lamb was standing in the vision, whether close to the throne or in the space between the throne and the elders (perhaps implied by "came" in verse 7|, but nearness to the throne is implied by strkjv@14:1; strkjv@Acts:7:56; strkjv@Hebrews:10:11|). {A Lamb} (\arnion\). Elsewhere in the N.T. \ho amnos\ is used of Christ (John:1:29,36; Acts strkjv@8:32; strkjv@1Peter:1:19| like strkjv@Isaiah:53:7|), but in the Apocalypse \to arnion\ occurs for the Crucified Christ 29 times in twelve chapters. {Standing} (\hestkos\). Second perfect active (intransitive of \histmi\) neuter accusative singular (grammatical gender like \arnion\), though some MSS. read \hestks\ (natural gender masculine and nominative in spite of \eidon\ construction according to sense). {As though it had been slain} (\hs esphagmenon\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \sphaz\, old word, in N.T. only in strkjv@Revelation:5:6,9,12; strkjv@6:4,9; strkjv@13:3; strkjv@18:24; strkjv@1John:3:12|. \Hs\ (as if) is used because the Lamb is now alive, but (in appearance) with the marks of the sacrifice. The Christ as the Lamb is both sacrifice and Priest (Hebrews:9:12f.; strkjv@10:11|). {Having} (\echn\). Construction according to sense again with masculine nominative participle instead of \echonta\ (masculine accusative singular) or \echon\ (neuter accusative singular). Seven horns (\keras\) is a common symbol in the O.T. for strength and kingly power (1Samuel:2:10; strkjv@1Kings:22:11; strkjv@Psalms:112:9; strkjv@Daniel:7:7,20ff.|) and often in Rev. (Revelation:12:3; strkjv@13:1; strkjv@17:3,12|). Fulness of power (the All-powerful one) is symbolized by seven. {Seven eyes} (\ophthalmous hepta\). Like strkjv@Zechariah:3:9; strkjv@4:10| and denotes here, as there, omniscience. Here they are identified with the seven Spirits of Christ, while in strkjv@1:4| the seven Spirits are clearly the Holy Spirit of God (3:1|), and blaze like torches (4:5|), like the eyes of Christ (1:14|). The Holy Spirit is both Spirit of God and of Christ (Romans:8:9|). {Sent forth} (\apestalmenoi\). Perfect passive predicate participle of \apostell\, masculine plural (agreeing with \hoi\ and \ophthalmous\ in gender), but some MSS. have \apestalmena\ agreeing with the nearer \pneumata\.

rwp@Revelation:5:12 @{Worthy} (\axion\). Agreeing in gender (grammatical neuter) with \arnion\, but some MSS. have \axios\ (masculine, natural gender). Note change to third person \estin\ instead of second \ei\. The point of the song is the same as that in verses 9,10|, but the language differs. Note the repeated article \to\ (the lamb the slain) referring to verses 6,9|. Note also the one article \tn\ before \dunamin\ for all the seven grounds of praise (\dunamin\, power, \plouton\, wealth, \sophian\, wisdom, \ischun\, strength, \timn\, honor, \doxan\, glory, \eulogian\, blessing), though \plouton\ is masculine, in contrast with separate article for each item (all three feminine) in strkjv@4:11|, here grouping them all together, "a heptad of praise" (Swete).

rwp@Revelation:5:13 @{Every created thing} (\pn ktisma\). Every creature in a still wider antiphonal circle beyond the circle of angels (from \ktiz\, for which see strkjv@1Timothy:4:4; strkjv@James:1:18|), from all the four great fields of life (in heaven, upon the earth, under the earth as in verse 3|, with on the sea \epi ts thalasss\ added). No created thing is left out. This universal chorus of praise to Christ from all created life reminds one of the profound mystical passage in strkjv@Romans:8:20-22| concerning the sympathetic agony of creation (\ktisis\) in hope of freedom from the bondage of corruption. If the trail of the serpent is on all creation, it will be ultimately thrown off. {Saying} (\legontas\). Masculine (construction according to sense, personifying the created things) if genuine, though some MSS. have \legonta\ (grammatical gender agreeing with \panta\) present active participle of \leg\, to say. {And to the Lamb} (\kai ti arnii\). Dative case. Praise and worship are rendered to the Lamb precisely as to God on the throne. Note separate articles here in the doxology as in strkjv@4:11| and the addition of \to kratos\ (active power) in place of \ischus\ (reserve of strength) in strkjv@5:12|.

rwp@Revelation:6:8 @{A pale horse} (\hippos chlros\). Old adjective. Contracted from \chloeros\ (from \chlo\, tender green grass) used of green grass (Mark:6:39; strkjv@Revelation:8:7; strkjv@9:4|), here for yellowish, common in both senses in old Greek, though here only in N.T. in this sense, greenish yellow. We speak of a sorrel horse, never of a green horse. Zechariah (Zechariah:6:3|) uses \poikilos\ (grizzled or variegated). Homer used \chlros\ of the ashen colour of a face blanched by fear (pallid) and so the pale horse is a symbol of death and of terror. {His name was Death} (\onoma auti ho thanatos\). Anacoluthon in grammatical structure like that in strkjv@John:3:1| (cf. strkjv@Revelation:2:26|) and common enough. Death is the name of this fourth rider (so personified) and there is with Death "his inseparable comrade, Hades (1:16; strkjv@20:13f.|)" (Swete). Hades (\hids\, alpha privative, and \idein\, to see, the unseen) is the abode of the dead, the keys of which Christ holds (Revelation:1:18|). {Followed} (\kolouthei\). Imperfect active of \akolouthe\, kept step with death, whether on the same horse or on another horse by his side or on foot John does not say. {Over the fourth part of the earth} (\epi to tetarton ts gs\). Partitive genitive \gs\ after \tetarton\. Wider authority (\exousia\) was given to this rider than to the others, though what part of the earth is included in the fourth part is not indicated. {To kill} (\apokteinai\). First aorist active infinitive of \apoktein\, explanation of the \exousia\ (authority). The four scourges of strkjv@Ezekiel:14:21| are here reproduced with instrumental \en\ with the inanimate things (\romphaii, limi thanati\) and \hupo\ for the beasts (\thrin\). Death here (\thanati\) seems to mean pestilence as the Hebrew does (\loimos\ -- cf. \limos\ famine). Cf. the "black death" for a plague.

rwp@Revelation:12:7 @{There was war in heaven} (\egeneto polemos en ti ourani\). "There came to be war in heaven" (\egeneto\, not \n\). "Another \tableau\, not a \smeion\ (vv. 1,3|), but consequent upon the two \smeia\ which precede it. The birth and rapture of the Woman's Son issue in a war which invades the \epourania\" (Swete). The reference is not to the original rebellion of Satan, as Andreas held. As the coming of Christ brought on fresh manifestations of diabolic power (Mark:1:13; strkjv@Luke:22:3,31; strkjv@John:12:31; strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11|), just so Christ's return to heaven is pictured as being the occasion of renewed attacks there. We are not to visualize it too literally, but certainly modern airplanes help us to grasp the notion of battles in the sky even more than the phalanxes of storm-clouds (Swete). John even describes this last conflict as in heaven itself. Cf. strkjv@Luke:10:18; strkjv@1Kings:22:1ff.; strkjv@Job:1; 2; strkjv@Zechariah:3:1ff|. {Michael and his angels} (\ho Michal kai hoi aggeloi autou\). The nominative here may be in apposition with \polemos\, but it is an abnormal construction with no verb, though \egeneto\ (arose) can be understood as repeated. Michael is the champion of the Jewish people (Daniel:10:13,21; strkjv@12:1|) and is called the archangel in strkjv@Jude:9|. {Going forth to war} (\tou polemsai\). This genitive articular infinitive is another grammatical problem in this sentence. If \egeneto\ (arose) is repeated as above, then we have the infinitive for purpose, a common enough idiom. Otherwise it is anomalous, not even like strkjv@Acts:10:25|. {With the dragon} (\meta tou drakontos\). On the use of \meta\ with \poleme\ see strkjv@2:16; strkjv@13:4; strkjv@17:14| (nowhere else in N.T.). The devil has angels under his command (Matthew:25:41|) and preachers also (2Corinthians:11:14f.|). {Warred} (\epolemsen\). Constative aorist active indicative of \poleme\, picturing the whole battle in one glimpse.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ RELATION TO THE FOURTH GOSPEL Here scholars divide again. Many who deny the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the Epistles accept the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse, Baur, for instance. Hort, Lightfoot, and Westcott argued for the Johannine authorship on the ground that the Apocalypse was written early (time of Nero or Vespasian) when John did not know Greek so well as when the Epistles and the Gospel were written. There are numerous grammatical laxities in the Apocalypse, termed by Charles a veritable grammar of its own. They are chiefly retention of the nominative case in appositional words or phrases, particularly participles, many of them sheer Hebraisms, many of them clearly intentional (as in strkjv@Revelation:1:4|), all of them on purpose according to Milligan (_Revelation_ in Schaff's Pop. Comm.) and Heinrici (_Der Litterarische Charakter der neutest. Schriften_, p. 85). Radermacher (_Neutestamentliche Grammatik_, p. 3) calls it "the most uncultured literary production that has come down to us from antiquity," and one finds frequent parallels to the linguistic peculiarities in later illiterate papyri. J. H. Moulton (_Grammar_, Vol. II, Part I, p. 3) says: "Its grammar is perpetually stumbling, its idiom is that of a foreign language, its whole style that of a writer who neither knows nor cares for literary form." But we shall see that the best evidence is for a date in Domitian's reign and not much later than the Fourth Gospel. It is worth noting that in strkjv@Acts:4:13| Peter and John are both termed by the Sanhedrin \agrammatoi kai iditai\ (unlettered and unofficial men). We have seen the possibility that II Peter represents Peter's real style or at least that of a different amanuensis from Silvanus in strkjv@1Peter:5:12|. It seems clear that the Fourth Gospel underwent careful scrutiny and possibly by the elders in Ephesus (John:21:24|). If John wrote the Apocalypse while in Patmos and so away from Ephesus, it seems quite possible that here we have John's own uncorrected style more than in the Gospel and Epistles. There is also the added consideration that the excitement of the visions played a part along with a certain element of intentional variations from normal grammatical sequence. An old man's excitement would bring back his early style. There are numerous coincidences in vocabulary and style between the Fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse.

rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE VISIONS No theory of authorship, sources, or date should ignore the fact that the author claims to have had a series of visions in Patmos. It does not follow that he wrote them down at once and without reflection, but it seems hardly congruous to think that he waited till he had returned from exile in Patmos to Ephesus before writing them out. In fact, there is a note of sustained excitement all through the book, combined with high literary skill in the structure of the book in spite of the numerous grammatical lapses. The series of sevens bear a relation to one another, but more in the fashion of a kaleidoscope than of a chronological panorama. And yet there is progress and power in the arrangement and the total effect. There is constant use of Old Testament language and imagery, almost a mosaic, but without a single formal quotation. There is constant repetition of words and phrases in true Johannine style. Each of the messages to the seven churches picks out a metaphor in the first picture of Christ in chapter I and there are frequent other allusions to the language in this picture. In fact there is genuine artistic skill in the structure of the book, in spite of the deflections from ordinary linguistic standards. In the visions and all through the book there is constant use of symbols, as is the fashion in apocalypses like the beasts, the scorpions, the horses, etc. These symbols probably were understood by the first readers of the book, though the key to them is lost to us. Even the numbers in the book (3 1/2, 7, 3, 4, 12, 24, 1000) cannot be pressed, though some do so. Even Harnack called the Apocalypse the plainest book in the New Testament, by using Harnack's key for the symbols.

rwp@Romans:8:16 @{The Spirit himself} (\auto to pneuma\). The grammatical gender of \pneuma\ is neuter as here, but the Greek used also the natural gender as we do exclusively as in strkjv@John:16:13| \ekeinos\ (masculine {he}), \to pneuma\ (neuter). See also strkjv@John:16:26| (\ho--ekeinos\). It is a grave mistake to use the neuter "it" or "itself" when referring to the Holy Spirit. {Beareth witness with our spirit} (\summarturei ti pneumati hmn\). See on ¯Romans:2:15| for this verb with associative instrumental case. See strkjv@1John:5:10f.| for this double witness.

rwp@Titus:3:6 @{Which} (\hou\). Genitive case by attraction from \ho\ (grammatical gender) to the case of \pneumatos hagiou\. We do not have grammatical gender (only natural) in English. Hence here we should say "whom," even if it does not go smoothly with \execheen\ (he poured out, second aorist active indicative of \ekche\). The reference is to the great Pentecost (Acts:2:33|) as foretold by Joel (Joel:2:28|). {Richly} (\plousis\). Then and to each one in his own experience. See strkjv@Romans:10:12; strkjv@1Timothy:6:17|.