NONE.filter - rwp puts:
rwp@
1Corinthians:2:1 @{Not with excellency of speech or of wisdom} (\ou kath' huperochn logou sophias\). \Huperoch\ is an old word from the verb \huperech\ (Phillipians:4:7|) and means preeminence, rising above. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:2:2| of magistrates. It occurs in inscriptions of Pergamum for persons of position (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 255). Here it means excess or superfluity, "not in excellence of rhetorical display or of philosophical subtlety" (Lightfoot). {The mystery of God} (\to mustrion tou theou\). Songs:Aleph A C Copt. like strkjv@2:7|, but B D L P read \marturion\ like strkjv@1:6|. Probably {mystery} is correct. Christ crucified is the mystery of God (Colossians:2:2|). Paul did not hesitate to appropriate this word in common use among the mystery religions, but he puts into it his ideas, not those in current use. It is an old word from \mue\, to close, to shut, to initiate (Phillipians:4:12|). This mystery was once hidden from the ages (Colossians:1:26|), but is now made plain in Christ (1Corinthians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:16:25f.|). The papyri give many illustrations of the use of the word for secret doctrines known only to the initiated (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_).
rwp@1Corinthians:4:6 @{I have in a figure transferred} (\meteschmatisa\). First aorist active (not perfect) indicative of \meta-schmatiz\, used by Plato and Aristotle for changing the form of a thing (from \meta\, after, and \schma\, form or habit, like Latin _habitus_ from \ech\ and so different from \morph\ as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). For the idea of refashioning see Field, _Notes_, p. 169f. and Preisigke, _Fachworter_). Both Greek and Latin writers (Quintilian, Martial) used \schma\ for a rhetorical artifice. Paul's use of the word (in Paul only in N.T.) appears also further in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:13-15| where the word occurs three times, twice of the false apostles posing and passing as apostles of Christ and ministers of righteousness, and once of Satan as an angel of light, twice with \eis\ and once with \hs\. In strkjv@Phillipians:3:21| the word is used for the change in the body of our humiliation to the body of glory. But here it is clearly the rhetorical figure for a veiled allusion to Paul and Apollos "for your sakes" (\dia humas\). {That in us ye may learn} (\hina en hmin mathte\). Final clause with \hina\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \manthan\, to learn. As an object lesson in our cases (\en hmin\). It is no more true of Paul and Apollos than of other ministers, but the wrangles in Corinth started about them. Songs:Paul boldly puts himself and Apollos to the fore in the discussion of the principles involved. {Not to go beyond the things which are written} (\to M huper ha gegraptai\). It is difficult to reproduce the Greek idiom in English. The article \to\ is in the accusative case as the object of the verb \mathte\ (learn) and points at the words "\M huper ha gegraptai\," apparently a proverb or rule, and elliptical in form with no principal verb expressed with \m\, whether "think" (Auth.) or "go" (Revised). There was a constant tendency to smooth out Paul's ellipses as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26,31|. Lightfoot thinks that Paul may have in mind O.T. passages quoted in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:19,31; strkjv@3:19,20|. {That ye be not puffed up} (\hina m phusiousthe\). Sub-final use of \hina\ (second use in this sentence) with notion of result. It is not certain whether \phusiousthe\ (late verb form like \phusia, phusa\, to blow up, to inflate, to puff up), used only by Paul in the N.T., is present indicative with \hina\ like \zloute\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:17| (cf. \hina ginskomen\ in strkjv@1John:5:20|) or the present subjunctive by irregular contraction (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 203, 342f.), probably the present indicative. \Phusio\ is from \phusis\ (nature) and so meant to make natural, but it is used by Paul just like \phusa\ or \phusia\ (from \phusa\, a pair of bellows), a vivid picture of self-conceit. {One for the one against the other} (\heis huper tou henos kata tou heterou\). This is the precise idea of this idiom of partitive apposition. This is the rule with partisans. They are "for" (\huper\) the one and "against" (\kata\, down on, the genitive case) the other (\tou heterou\, not merely another or a second, but the different sort, \heterodox\).
rwp@1Corinthians:5:10 @{Not altogether} (\ou pants\). Not absolutely, not in all circumstances. Paul thus puts a limitation on his prohibition and confines it to members of the church. He has no jurisdiction over the outsiders (this world, \tou kosmou toutou\). {The covetous} (\tois pleonektais\). Old word for the over-reachers, those avaricious for more and more (\pleon, ech\, to have more). In N.T. only here, strkjv@6:10; strkjv@Ephesians:5:5|. It always comes in bad company (the licentious and the idolaters) like the modern gangsters who form a combination of liquor, lewdness, lawlessness for money and power. {Extortioners} (\harpaxin\). An old adjective with only one gender, rapacious (Matthew:7:15; strkjv@Luke:18:11|), and as a substantive robber or extortioner (here and strkjv@6:10|). Bandits, hijackers, grafters they would be called today. {Idolaters} (\eidlolatrais\). Late word for hirelings (\latris\) of the idols (\eidlon\), so our very word idolater. See strkjv@6:9; strkjv@10:7; strkjv@Ephesians:5:5; strkjv@Revelation:21:8; strkjv@22:15|. Nageli regards this word as a Christian formation. {For then must ye needs} (\epei pheilete oun\). This neat Greek idiom of \epei\ with the imperfect indicative (\pheilete\, from \opheil\, to be under obligation) is really the conclusion of a second-class condition with the condition unexpressed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 965). Sometimes \an\ is used also as in strkjv@Hebrews:10:2|, but with verbs of obligation or necessity \an\ is usually absent as here (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:9:20|). The unexpressed condition here would be, "if that were true" (including fornicators, the covetous, extortioners, idolaters of the outside world). \Ara\ means in that case.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:13 @{But God shall bring to nought both it and them} (\ho de theos kai tautn kai tauta katargsei\). Another proverb about the adaptation of the belly (\koilia\) and food (\brmata\, not just flesh), which had apparently been used by some in Corinth to justify sexual license (fornication and adultery). These Gentiles mixed up matters not alike at all (questions of food and sensuality). " We have traces of this gross moral confusion in the circumstances which dictated the Apostolic Letter (Acts:15:23-29|), where things wholly diverse are combined, as directions about meats to be avoided and a prohibition of fornication" (Lightfoot). Both the belly (\tautn\) and the foods (\tauta\) God will bring to an end by death and change. {But the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body} (\to de sma ou ti porneii alla ti kurii, kai ho kurios ti smati\). Paul here boldly shows the fallacy in the parallel about appetite of the belly for food. The human body has a higher mission than the mere gratification of sensual appetite. Sex is of God for the propagation of the race, not for prostitution. Paul had already stated that God dwells in us as the sanctuary of the Holy Spirit (3:16f.|). This higher function of the body he here puts forward against the debased Greek philosophy of the time which ignored completely Paul's idea, "the body for the Lord and the Lord for the body" (dative of personal interest in both cases). "The Lord Jesus and \porneia\ contested for the bodies of Christian men; loyal to him they must renounce _that_, yielding to _that_ they renounce him" (Findlay).
rwp@1Corinthians:9:6 @{Have we not a right to forbear working?} (\ouk echomen exousian m ergazesthai;\). By \\ (or) Paul puts the other side about Barnabas (the only allusion since the dispute in strkjv@Acts:15:39|, but in good spirit) and himself. Perhaps (Hofmann) Paul has in mind the fact that in the first great mission tour (Acts:13; 14|), Barnabas and Paul received no help from the church in Antioch, but were left to work their way along at their own charges. It was not till the Philippian Church took hold that Paul had financial aid (Phillipians:4:15|). Here both negatives have their full force. Literally, Do we not have (\ouk echomen\, expecting the affirmative reply) the right not (\m\, negative of the infinitive \ergazesthai\) to do manual labour (usual meaning of \ergazomai\ as in strkjv@4:12|)?" There was no more compulsion on Paul and Barnabas to support themselves than upon the other workers for Christ. They renounced no rights in being voluntarily independent.
rwp@1Corinthians:Note @\m melei\ expects the negative answer, impersonal verb with dative and genitive cases (\theoi\, God, \bon\, oxen). {Altogether} (\pants\). But here probably with the notion of doubtless or assuredly. The editors differ in the verse divisions here. The Canterbury Version puts both these questions in verse 10|, the American Standard the first in verse 9|, the second in verse 10|.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:29 @{For why is my liberty judged by another conscience?} (\hina ti gar h eleutheria mou krinetai hupo alls suneidses;\). Supply \gentai\ (deliberative subjunctive) after \ti\. Paul deftly puts himself in the place of the strong brother at such a banquet who is expected to conform his conscience to that of the weak brother who makes the point about a particular piece of meat. It is an abridgment of one's personal liberty in the interest of the weak brother. Two individualities clash. The only reason is love which builds up (8:2| and all of chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13|). There is this eternal collision between the forces of progress and reaction. If they work together, they must consider the welfare of each other.
rwp@1Peter:2:24 @{Who his own self} (\hos autos\). Intensive pronoun with the relative referring to Christ (note relatives also in verses 22,23|). {Bare our sins} (\annegken tas hamartias hmn\). Second aorist active indicative of \anapher\, common verb of bringing sacrifice to the altar. Combination here of strkjv@Isaiah:53:12; strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:23|. Jesus is the perfect sin offering (Hebrews:9:28|). For Christ's body (\sma\) as the offering see strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24|. "Here St. Peter puts the Cross in the place of the altar" (Bigg). {Upon the tree} (\epi to xulon\). Not tree here as in strkjv@Luke:23:31|, originally just wood (1Corinthians:3:12|), then something made of wood, as a gibbet or cross. Songs:used by Peter for the Cross in strkjv@Acts:5:30; strkjv@10:39|; and by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3:13| (quoting strkjv@Deuteronomy:21:23|). {Having died unto sins} (\tais hamartiais apogenomenoi\). Second aorist middle participle of \apoginomai\, old compound to get away from, with dative (as here) to die to anything, here only in N.T. {That we might live unto righteousness} (\hina ti dikaiosuni zsmen\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \za\ with the dative (cf. strkjv@Romans:6:20|). Peter's idea here is like that of Paul in strkjv@Romans:6:1-23|, especially verses 2,10f.|). {By whose stripes ye were healed} (\hou ti mlpi iathte\). From strkjv@Isaiah:53:5|. First aorist passive indicative of \iaomai\, common verb to heal (James:5:16|) and the instrumental case of \mlps\, rare word (Aristotle, Plutarch) for bruise or bloody wound, here only in N.T. Cf. strkjv@1:18|. Writing to slaves who may have received such stripes, Peter's word is effective.
rwp@2Corinthians:5:19 @{To wit, that} (\hs hoti\). Latin puts it _quoniam quidem_. It is an unclassical idiom, but occurs in the papyri and inscriptions (Moulton, _Prol_., p. 212; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1033). It is in strkjv@Esther:4:14|. See also strkjv@2Corinthians:11:21; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2|. It probably means "how that." {Not reckoning} (\m logizomenos\). What Jesus did (his death for us) stands to our credit (Romans:8:32|) if we make our peace with God. This is our task, "the word of reconciliation," that we may receive "the righteousness of God" and be adopted into the family of God.
rwp@2Corinthians:11:14 @{An angel of light} (\aggelon phtos\). The prince of darkness puts on the garb of light and sets the fashion for his followers in the masquerade to deceive the saints. "Like master like man." Cf. strkjv@2:11; strkjv@Galatians:1:8|. This terrible portrayal reveals the depth of Paul's feelings about the conduct of the Judaizing leaders in Corinth. In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| he terms those in Jerusalem "false brethren."
rwp@2Corinthians:12:18 @{The brother} (\ton adelphon\). Probably the brother of Titus (cf. strkjv@8:18|). {Did Titus take advantage of you?} (\mti epleonektsen humas Titos?\). That puts the issue squarely. {By the same Spirit} (\ti auti pneumati\). That translation refers to the Holy Spirit and makes the case instrumental. The locative case, "in the same spirit," makes it mean that Paul's attitude is the same as that of Titus and most likely is correct, for "in the same steps" (\tois autois ichnesin\) is in locative case.
rwp@2Peter:3:16 @{As also in all his epistles} (\hs kai en pasais epistolais\). We do not know to how many Peter here refers. There is no difficulty in supposing that Peter "received every one of St. Paul's Epistles within a month or two of its publication" (Bigg). And yet Peter does not here assert the formation of a canon of Paul's Epistles. {Speaking in them of these things} (\laln en autais peri toutn\). Present active participle of \lale\. That is to say, Paul also wrote about the second coming of Christ, as is obviously true. {Hard to be understood} (\dusnota\). Late verbal from \dus\ and \noe\ (in Aristotle, Lucian, Diog. Laert.), here only in N.T. We know that the Thessalonians persisted in misrepresenting Paul on this very subject of the second coming as Hymenaeus and Philetus did about the resurrection (2Timothy:2:17|) and Spitta holds that Paul's teaching about grace was twisted to mean moral laxity like strkjv@Galatians:3:10; strkjv@Romans:3:20,28; strkjv@5:20| (with which cf. strkjv@6:1| as a case in point), etc. Peter does not say that he himself did not understand Paul on the subject of faith and freedom. {Unlearned} (\amatheis\). Old word (alpha privative and \manthan\ to learn), ignorant, here only in N.T. {Unsteadfast} (\astriktoi\). See on ¯2:14|. {Wrest} (\streblousin\). Present active indicative of \streblo\, old verb (from \streblos\ twisted, \streph\, to turn), here only in N.T. {The other scriptures} (\tas loipas graphas\). There is no doubt that the apostles claimed to speak by the help of the Holy Spirit (1Thessalonians:5:27; strkjv@Colossians:4:16|) just as the prophets of old did (2Peter:1:20f.|). Note \loipas\ (rest) here rather than \allas\ (other). Peter thus puts Paul's Epistles on the same plane with the O.T., which was also misused (Matthew:5:21-44; strkjv@15:3-6; strkjv@19:3-10|).
rwp@2Thessalonians:1:6 @{If so be that it is a righteous thing with God} (\eiper dikaion para thei\). Condition of first class, determined as fulfilled, assumed as true, but with \eiper\ (if on the whole, provided that) as in strkjv@Romans:8:9,17|, and with no copula expressed. A righteous thing "with God" means by the side of God (\para thei\) and so from God's standpoint. This is as near to the idea of absolute right as it is possible to attain. Note the phrase in verse 5|. {To recompense affliction to them that afflict you} (\antapodounai tois thlibousin hms thlipsin\). Second aorist active infinitive of double compound \ant-apodidmi\, old verb, either in good sense as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:9| or in bad sense as here. Paul is certain of this principle, though he puts it conditionally.
rwp@2Thessalonians:3:6 @{Now we command you} (\paraggellomen de humin\). Paul puts into practice the confidence expressed on their obedience to his commands in verse 4|. {In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ} (\en onomati tou kuriou Isou Christou\). {Name} (\onoma\) here for authority of Jesus Christ with which compare {through the Lord Jesus} (\dia tou kuriou Isou\) in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:2|. For a full discussion of the phrase see the monograph of W. Heitmuller, _Im Namen Jesu_. Paul wishes his readers to realize the responsibility on them for their obedience to his command. {That ye withdraw yourselves} (\stellesthai humas\). Present middle (direct) infinitive of \stell\, old verb to place, arrange, make compact or shorten as sails, to move oneself from or to withdraw oneself from (with \apo\ and the ablative). In strkjv@2Corinthians:8:20| the middle voice (\stellomenoi\) means taking care. {From every brother that walketh disorderly} (\apo pantos adelphou atakts peripatountos\). He calls him "brother" still. The adverb \atakts\ is common in Plato and is here and verse 11| alone in the N.T., though the adjective \ataktos\, equally common in Plato we had in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14| which see. Military term, out of ranks. {And not after the tradition} (\kai m kata tn paradosin\). See on ¯2:15| for \paradosin\. {Which they received of us} (\hn parelabosan par hmn\). Westcott and Hort put this form of the verb (second aorist indicative third person plural of \paralamban\, the \-osan\ form instead of \-on\, with slight support from the papyri, but in the LXX and the Boeotian dialect, Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 335f.) in the margin with \parelabete\ (ye received) in the text. There are five different readings of the verb here, the others being \parelabon, parelabe, elabosan\.
rwp@2Thessalonians:3:9 @{Not because we have not the right} (\ouch hoti ouk echomen exousian\). Paul is sensitive on his {right} to receive adequate support (1Thessalonians:2:6; 1 Co strkjv@9:4| where he uses the same word \exousian\ in the long defence of this {right}, strkjv@1Corinthians:9:1-27|). Songs:he here puts in this limitation to avoid misapprehension. He did allow churches to help him where he would not be misunderstood (2Corinthians:11:7-11; strkjv@Phillipians:4:45f.|). Paul uses \ouch hoti\ elsewhere to avoid misunderstanding (2Corinthians:1:24; strkjv@3:5; strkjv@Phillipians:4:17|). {But to make ourselves an ensample unto you} (\all' hina heautous tupon dmen humin\). Literally, {but that we might give ourselves a type to you}. Purpose with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \didmi\. On \tupon\ see on ¯1Thessalonians:1:7|.
rwp@Info_Acts @ THE DATE There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy _post eventum_. The other reason is the alleged use of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work A.D. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Acts:5:36f|. and Josephus, _Ant_. XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz (_Dictionary of the Apostolic Church_, art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. Songs:Luke (Luke:13:1f.|) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in strkjv@Acts:12:20-23| and _Ant_. XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul's release, that is by A.D. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of \prton\ (first) in strkjv@Acts:1:1| is a common _Koin_ idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark's Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.
rwp@Acts:2:14 @{Standing up with the eleven} (\statheis sun tois hendeka\). Took his stand with the eleven including Matthias, who also rose up with them, and spoke as their spokesman, a formal and impressive beginning. The Codex Bezae has "ten apostles." Luke is fond of this pictorial use of \statheis\ (first aorist passive participle of \histmi\) as seen nowhere else in the N.T. (Luke:18:11,40; strkjv@19:8; strkjv@Acts:5:20; strkjv@17:22; strkjv@27:21|). {Lifted up his voice} (\epren tn phnn autou\). This phrase only in Luke in the N.T. (Luke:11:29; strkjv@Acts:2:14; strkjv@14:11; strkjv@22:22|), but is common in the old writers. First aorist active indicative of \epair\. The large crowd and the confusion of tongues demanded loud speaking. "This most solemn, earnest, yet sober speech" (Bengel). Codex Bezae adds "first" after "voice." Peter did it to win and hold attention. {Give ear unto my words} (\entisasthe ta rhmata mou\). Late verb in LXX and only here in the N.T. First aorist middle from \entizomai\ (\en, ous\, ear) to give ear to, receive into the ear. People's ears differ greatly, but in public speech they have to be reached through the ear. That puts an obligation on the speaker and also on the auditors who should sit where they can hear with the ears which they have, an obligation often overlooked.
rwp@Acts:12:23 @{Smote him} (\epataxen auton\). Effective aorist active indicative of \patass\, old verb, used already in verse 7| of gentle smiting of the angel of the Lord, here of a severe stroke of affliction. Like Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel:4:30|) pride went before a fall. He was struck down in the very zenith of his glory. {Because} (\anth' hn\). \Anti\ with the genitive of the relative pronoun, "in return for which things." He accepted the impious flattery (Hackett) instead of giving God the glory. He was a nominal Jew. {He was eaten of worms} (\genomenos sklkobrtos\). Ingressive aorist middle participle, "becoming worm-eaten." The compound verbal adjective (\sklx\, worm, \brtos\, eaten, from \bibrsk\) is a late word (II Macc. strkjv@9:9) of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, used also of a tree (Theophrastus), here only in the N.T. The word \sklx\ was used of intestinal worms and Herodotus (IV. 205) describes Pheretima, Queen of Cyrene, as having swarms of worms which ate her flesh while still alive. Josephus (_Ant_. XIX. 8, 2) says that Herod Agrippa lingered for five days and says that the rotting of his flesh produced worms, an item in harmony with the narrative in Luke. Josephus gives further details, one a superstitious sight of an owl sitting on one of the ropes of the awning of the theatre while the people flattered him, an omen of his death to him. Luke puts it simply that God smote him. {Gave up the ghost} (\exepsuxen\). Effective aorist active of \ekpsuch\, to breathe out, late verb, medical term in Hippocrates, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:5:5,10; strkjv@12:23|. Herod was carried out of the theatre a dying man and lingered only five days.
rwp@Acts:13:30 @{But God raised him from the dead} (\ho de theos geiren ek nekrn\). This crucial fact Paul puts sharply as he always did.
rwp@Acts:22:3 @{I am a Jew} (\Eg eimi anr Ioudaios\). Note use of \Eg\ for emphasis. Paul recounts his Jewish advantages or privileges with manifest pride as in strkjv@Acts:26:4f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:22; strkjv@Galatians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {Born} (\gegennmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \genna\. See above in strkjv@21:39| for the claim of Tarsus as his birth-place. He was a Hellenistic Jew, not an Aramaean Jew (cf. strkjv@Acts:6:1|). {Brought up} (\anatethrammenos\). Perfect passive participle again of \anatreph\, to nurse up, to nourish up, common old verb, but in the N.T. only here, strkjv@7:20ff.|, and MSS. in strkjv@Luke:4:16|. The implication is that Paul was sent to Jerusalem while still young, "from my youth" (26:4|), how young we do not know, possibly thirteen or fourteen years old. He apparently had not seen Jesus in the flesh (2Corinthians:5:16|). {At the feet of Gamaliel} (\pros tous podas Gamalil\). The rabbis usually sat on a raised seat with the pupils in a circle around either on lower seats or on the ground. Paul was thus nourished in Pharisaic Judaism as interpreted by Gamaliel, one of the lights of Judaism. For remarks on Gamaliel see chapter strkjv@5:34ff|. He was one of the seven Rabbis to whom the Jews gave the highest title \Rabban\ (our Rabbi). \Rabbi\ (my teacher) was next, the lowest being \Rab\ (teacher). "As Aquinas among the schoolmen was called _Doctor Angelicus_, and Bonaventura _Doctor Seraphicus_, so Gamaliel was called _the Beauty of the Law_" (Conybeare and Howson). {Instructed} (\pepaideumenos\). Perfect passive participle again (each participle beginning a clause), this time of \paideu\, old verb to train a child (\pais\) as in strkjv@7:22| which see. In this sense also in strkjv@1Timothy:1:20; strkjv@Titus:2:12|. Then to chastise as in strkjv@Luke:23:16,22| (which see); strkjv@2Timothy:2:25; strkjv@Hebrews:12:6f|. {According to the strict manner} (\kata akribeian\). Old word, only here in N.T. Mathematical accuracy, minute exactness as seen in the adjective in strkjv@26:5|. See also strkjv@Romans:10:2; Gal strkjv@1:4; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {Of our fathers} (\patriou\). Old adjective from \pater\, only here and strkjv@24:14| in N.T. Means descending from father to son, especially property and other inherited privileges. \Patrikos\ (patrician) refers more to personal attributes and affiliations. {Being zealous for God} (\zlts huparchn tou theou\). Not adjective, but substantive {zealot} (same word used by James of the thousands of Jewish Christians in Jerusalem, strkjv@21:20| which see) with objective genitive \tou theou\ (for God). See also verse 14; strkjv@28:17; strkjv@2Timothy:1:3| where he makes a similar claim. Songs:did Peter (Acts:3:13; strkjv@5:30|) and Stephen (7:32|). Paul definitely claims, whatever freedom he demanded for Gentile Christians, to be personally "a zealot for God" "even as ye all are this day" (\kaths pantes humeis este smeron\). In his conciliation he went to the limit and puts himself by the side of the mob in their zeal for the law, mistaken as they were about him. He was generous surely to interpret their fanatical frenzy as zeal for God. But Paul is sincere as he proceeds to show by appeal to his own conduct.
rwp@Acts:23:25 @{And he wrote} (\grapsas\). First aorist active participle of \graph\, agreeing with the subject (Lysias) of \eipen\ (said) back in verse 23| (beginning). {After this form} (\echousan ton tupon touton\). Textus Receptus has \periechousan\. The use of \tupon\ (type or form) like _exemplum_ in Latin (Page who quotes Cicero _Ad Att_. IX. 6. 3) may give merely the purport or substantial contents of the letter. But there is no reason for thinking that it is not a genuine copy since the letter may have been read in open court before Felix, and Luke was probably with Paul. The Roman law required that a subordinate officer like Lysias in reporting a case to his superior should send a written statement of the case and it was termed _elogium_. A copy of the letter may have been given Paul after his appeal to Caesar. It was probably written in Latin. The letter is a "dexterous mixture of truth and falsehood" (Furneaux) with the stamp of genuineness. It puts things in a favourable light for Lysias and makes no mention of his order to scourge Paul.
rwp@Colossians:3:17 @{Whatsoever ye do} (\pn hoti ean poite\). Indefinite relative (everything whatever) with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive, a common idiom in such clauses. {Do all} (\panta\). The imperative \poieite\ has to be supplied from \poite\ in the relative clause. \Panta\ is repeated from \pn\ (singular), but in the plural (all things). \Pn\ is left as a nominative absolute as in strkjv@Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:10|. This is a sort of Golden Rule for Christians "in the name of the Lord Jesus" (\en onomati Kuriou Isou\), in the spirit of the Lord Jesus (Ephesians:5:20|). What follows (directions to the various groups) is in this same vein. Sociological problems have always existed. Paul puts his finger on the sore spot in each group with unerring skill like a true diagnostician.
rwp@Colossians:4:3 @{Withal} (\hama\). At the same time. {That God may open} (\hina ho theos anoixi\). Common use of \hina\ and the subjunctive (aorist), the sub-final use so common in the N.T. as in the _Koin_. {A door for the word} (\thuran tou logou\). Objective genitive, a door for preaching. It is comforting to other preachers to see the greatest of all preachers here asking prayer that he may be set free again to preach. He uses this figure elsewhere, once of a great and open door with many adversaries in Ephesus (1Corinthians:16:9|), once of an open door that he could not enter in Troas (2Corinthians:2:12|). {The mystery of Christ} (\to mustrion tou Christou\). The genitive of apposition, the mystery which is Christ (2:2|), one that puts out of comparison the foolish "mysteries" of the Gnostics. {For which I am also in bonds} (\di' ho kai dedemai\). Perfect passive indicative of \de\. Paul is always conscious of this limitation, this chain. At bottom he is a prisoner because of his preaching to the Gentiles.
rwp@Galatians:4:24 @{Which things contain an allegory} (\hatina estin allgoroumena\). Literally, "Which things are allegorized" (periphrastic present passive indicative of \allgore\). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used \ainittomai\ to speak in riddles. It is compounded of \allo\, another, and \agoreu\, to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses \tupiks\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11| of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_, the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|, the Good Shepherd in strkjv@John:10|. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo's allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it. {For these are} (\hautai gar eisin\). Allegorically interpreted, he means. {From Mount Sinai} (\apo orous Sin\). Spoken from Mount Sinai. {Bearing} (\gennsa\). Present active participle of \genna\, to beget of the male (Matthew:1:1-16|), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke:1:13,57|). {Which is Hagar} (\htis estin Hagar\). Allegorically interpreted.
rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE AUTHOR Origen bluntly wrote: "Who wrote the Epistle God only knows certainly" as quoted by Eusebius. Origen held that the thoughts were Paul's while Clement of Rome or Luke may have written the book. Clement of Alexandria (Eusebius says) thought that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and that Luke translated it into Greek. No early writer apparently attributed the Greek text to Paul. Eusebius thought it was originally written in Hebrew whether by Paul or not and translated by Clement of Rome. But there is no certainty anywhere in the early centuries. It was accepted first in the east and later in the west which first rejected it. But Jerome and Augustine accepted it. When the Renaissance came Erasmus had doubts, Luther attributed it to Apollos, Calvin denied the Pauline authorship. In North Africa it was attributed to Barnabas. In modern times Harnack has suggested Priscilla, but the masculine participle in strkjv@Hebrews:11:32| (\me digoumenon\) disposes of that theory. The oldest Greek MSS. (Aleph A B) have simply \Pros Hebraious\ as the title, but they place it before the Pastoral Epistles, while the Textus Receptus puts it after the Pastoral Epistles and Philemon. In the light of all the facts one can only make a guess without a sense of certainty. For myself I should with Luther guess Apollos as the most likely author of this book which is full of the Spirit of God.
rwp@Hebrews:2:9 @{Even Jesus} (\Isoun\). We do not see man triumphant, but we do see Jesus, for the author is not ashamed of his human name, realizing man's destiny, "the very one who has been made a little lower than the angels" (\ton brachu ti par' aggelous lattmenon\), quoting and applying the language of the Psalm in verse 7| to Jesus (with article \ton\ and the perfect passive participle of \elatta\). But this is not all. Death has defeated man, but Jesus has conquered death. {Because of the suffering of death} (\dia to pathma tou thanatou\). The causal sense of \dia\ with the accusative as in strkjv@1:14|. Jesus in his humanity was put lower than the angels "for a little while" (\brachu ti\). Because of the suffering of death we see (\blepomen\) Jesus crowned (\estephanmenon\, perfect passive participle of \stephano\ from verse 7|), crowned already "with glory and honour" as Paul shows in strkjv@Phillipians:2:9-11| (more highly exalted, \huperupssen\) "that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow." There is more glory to come to Jesus surely, but he is already at God's right hand (1:3|). {That by the grace of God he should taste death for every man} (\hops chariti theou huper pantos geustai thanatou\). This purpose clause (\hops\ instead of the more usual \hina\) is pregnant with meaning. The author interprets and applies the language of the Psalm to Jesus and here puts Christ's death in behalf of (\huper\), and so instead of, every man as the motive for his incarnation and death on the Cross. The phrase to taste death (\geuomai thanatou\) occurs in the Gospels (Matthew:16:28; strkjv@Mark:9:1; strkjv@Luke:9:27; strkjv@John:8:52|), though not in the ancient Greek. It means to see death (Hebrews:11:5|), "a bitter experience, not a rapid sip" (Moffatt). His death was in behalf of every one (not everything as the early Greek theologians took it). The death of Christ (Andrew Fuller) was sufficient for all, efficient for some. It is all "by the grace (\chariti\, instrumental case) of God," a thoroughly Pauline idea. Curiously enough some MSS. read \chris theou\ (apart from God) in place of \chariti theou\, Nestorian doctrine whatever the origin.
rwp@Hebrews:2:10 @{It became him} (\eprepen auti\). Imperfect active of \prep\, old verb to stand out, to be becoming or seemly. Here it is impersonal with \teleisai\ as subject, though personal in strkjv@Hebrews:7:26|. \Auti\ (him) is in the dative case and refers to God, not to Christ as is made plain by \ton archgon\ (author). One has only to recall strkjv@John:3:16| to get the idea here. The voluntary humiliation or incarnation of Christ the Son a little lower than the angels was a seemly thing to God the Father as the writer now shows in a great passage (2:10-18|) worthy to go beside strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. {For whom} (\di' hon\). Referring to \auti\ (God) as the reason (cause) for the universe (\ta panta\). {Through whom} (\di' hou\). With the genitive \dia\ expresses the agent by whom the universe came into existence, a direct repudiation of the Gnostic view of intermediate agencies (aeons) between God and the creation of the universe. Paul puts it succinctly in strkjv@Romans:11:36| by his \ex autou kai di' autou kai eis auton ta panta\. The universe comes out of God, by means of God, for God. This writer has already said that God used his Son as the Agent (\di' hou\) in creation (1:2|), a doctrine in harmony with strkjv@Colossians:1:15f.| (\en auti, di' autou eis auton\) and strkjv@John:1:3|. {In bringing} (\agagonta\). Second aorist active participle of \ag\ in the accusative case in spite of the dative \auti\ just before to which it refers. {The author} (\ton archgon\). Old compound word (\arch\ and \ag\) one leading off, leader or prince as in strkjv@Acts:5:31|, one blazing the way, a pioneer (Dods) in faith (Hebrews:12:2|), author (Acts:3:15|). Either sense suits here, though author best (verse 9|). Jesus is the author of salvation, the leader of the sons of God, the Elder Brother of us all (Romans:8:29|). {To make perfect} (\teleisai\). First aorist active infinitive of \teleio\ (from \teleios\). If one recoils at the idea of God making Christ perfect, he should bear in mind that it is the humanity of Jesus that is under discussion. The writer does not say that Jesus was sinful (see the opposite in strkjv@4:15|), but simply that "by means of sufferings" God perfected his Son in his human life and death for his task as Redeemer and Saviour. One cannot know human life without living it. There was no moral imperfection in Jesus, but he lived his human life in order to be able to be a sympathizing and effective leader in the work of salvation.
rwp@Hebrews:9:4 @{Having a golden censer} (\chrusoun echousa thumiatrion\). The present active participle \echousa\ (feminine singular) agrees with \skn\ (the Holy of Holies). It is not certain whether \thumiatrion\ here means censer or altar of incense. In the LXX (2Chronicles:26:19; strkjv@Exodus:8:11|; IV Macc. strkjv@7:11) it means censer and apparently so in the inscriptions and papyri. But in Philo and Josephus it means altar of incense for which the LXX has \thusiastrion tou thumiatos\ (Exodus:30:1-10|). Apparently the altar of incense was in the Holy Place, though in strkjv@Exodus:30:1-10| it is left quite vague. B puts it in verse 2|. Songs:we leave the discrepancy unsettled. At any rate the altar of incense was used for the Holy of Holies ("its ritual associations," Dods). {The ark of the covenant} (\tn kibton ts diathks\). A box or chest four feet long, two and a half broad and high (Exodus:25:10f.|). The Scotch have a "meal-ark." {Wherein} (\en hi\). In the ark. There were three treasures in the ark of the covenant (a pot of manna, Aaron's rod, the tables of the covenant). For the pot of manna (golden added in the LXX) see strkjv@Exodus:16:32-34|. For Aaron's rod that budded (\h blastsasa\, first aorist active participle of \blastan\) see strkjv@Numbers:17:1-11|. For the tables of the covenant see strkjv@Exodus:25:16f.; strkjv@31:18; strkjv@Deuteronomy:9:9; strkjv@10:5|. Not definitely clear about these items in the ark, but on front, except that strkjv@1Kings:8:9| states that it did contain the tables of the covenant. For \plakes\ (tables) see strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3| (only other N.T. example).
rwp@Info_James @ THE PURPOSE If James is writing solely to non-Christian Jews, the purpose is to win them to Christ, and so he puts the gospel message in a way to get a hearing from the Jews. That is true, whether he has them in mind or not, though he does not do it by the suppression of the deity of Jesus Christ. In the very first verse he places him on a par with God as "the Lord Jesus Christ." In strkjv@James:2:1| he presents Jesus as the object of faith: "as you believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Glory" (Moffatt's Translation), where Jesus is termed the Shekinah Glory of God. It is true that there is no discussion in the Epistle of the cross and the resurrection of Jesus, but there is an allusion to the murder of Jesus in strkjv@James:5:6| and the second coming in strkjv@James:5:8|. The chief aim of the Epistle is to strengthen the faith and loyalty of the Jewish Christians in the face of persecution from rich and overbearing Jews who were defrauding and oppressing them. It is a picture of early Christian life in the midst of difficult social conditions between capital and labor which also exist today. Songs:then it is a very modern message even if it is the earliest New Testament book. The glory of the New Testament lies precisely at this point in that the revelation of God in Christ meets our problems today because it did meet those of the first century A.D. Christian principles stand out clearly for our present-day living.
rwp@James:1:27 @{Pure religion and undefiled} (\thrskeia kathara kai amiantos\). Numerous examples in papyri and inscriptions of \thrskeia\ for ritual and reverential worship in the Roman Empire (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_; Deissmann, _St. Paul_, p. 251). As Hort shows, this is not a definition of religion or religious worship, but only a pertinent illustration of the right spirit of religion which leads to such acts. {Before our God and Father} (\para ti thei kai patri\). By the side of (\para\) and so from God's standpoint (Mark:10:27|). \Amiantos\ (compound verbal adjective, alpha privative, \miain\ to defile), puts in negative form (cf. strkjv@1:4,6|) the idea in \kathara\ (pure, clean). This (\haut\). Feminine demonstrative pronoun in the predicate agreeing with \thrskeia\. {To visit} (\episkeptesthai\). Epexegetic (explaining \haut\) present middle infinitive of \episkeptomai\, common verb to go to see, to inspect, present tense for habit of going to see. See strkjv@Matthew:25:36,43| for visiting the sick. {The fatherless and widows} (\orphanous kai chras\). "The natural objects of charity in the community" (Ropes). \Orphanos\ is old word for bereft of father or mother or both. In N.T. only here and strkjv@John:14:18|. Note order (orphans before widows). {Unspotted} (\aspilon\). Old adjective (alpha privative and \spilos\, spot), spotless. This the more important of the two illustrations and the hardest to execute. {To keep} (\trein\). Present active infinitive, "to keep on keeping oneself un-specked from the world" (a world, \kosmos\, full of dirt and slime that bespatters the best of men).
rwp@John:1:5 @{Shineth} (\phainei\). Linear present active indicative of \phain\, old verb from \pha\, to shine (\phaos, phs\). "The light keeps on giving light." {In the darkness} (\en ti skotii\). Late word for the common \skotos\ (kin to \skia\, shadow). An evident allusion to the darkness brought on by sin. In strkjv@2Peter:2:17| we have \ho zophos tou skotou\ (the blackness of darkness). The Logos, the only real moral light, keeps on shining both in the Pre-incarnate state and after the Incarnation. John is fond of \skotia\ (\skotos\) for moral darkness from sin and \phs\ (\phtiz, phain\) for the light that is in Christ alone. In strkjv@1John:2:8| he proclaims that "the darkness is passing by and the true light is already shining." The Gnostics often employed these words and John takes them and puts them in the proper place. {Apprehended it not} (\auto ou katelaben\). Second aorist active indicative of \katalamban\, old verb to lay hold of, to seize. This very phrase occurs in strkjv@John:12:35| (\hina m skotia humas katalabi\) "that darkness overtake you not," the metaphor of night following day and in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:4| the same idiom (\hina katalabi\) is used of day overtaking one as a thief. This is the view of Origen and appears also in 2Macc. strkjv@8:18. The same word appears in Aleph D in strkjv@John:6:17| \katelabe de autous h skotia\ ("but darkness overtook them," came down on them). Hence, in spite of the Vulgate _comprehenderunt_, "overtook" or "overcame" seems to be the idea here. The light kept on shining in spite of the darkness that was worse than a London fog as the Old Testament and archaeological discoveries in Egypt, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia, Crete, Asia Minor show.
rwp@John:3:15 @{That whosoever believeth may in him have eternal life} (\hina pas ho pisteun en auti echi zn ainion\). Final use of \hina\ with present active subjunctive of \ech\, that he may keep on having eternal life (a frequent phrase in John, always in John \ainios\ occurs with \z\, 16 times in the Gospel, 6 in 1John, ageless or endless life, beginning now and lasting forever). It is more than endless, for it is sharing in the life of God in Christ (5:26; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:5:12|). Songs:here \en auti\ (in him) is taken with \echi\ rather than with \pisteun\. The interview with Nicodemus apparently closes with verse 15|. In verses 16-21| we have past tenses constantly as is natural for the reflection of John, but unnatural for Jesus speaking. There are phrases like the Prologue (verse 19; strkjv@1:9-11|). "Only begotten" does not occur elsewhere in the words of Jesus, but is in strkjv@1:14,18; strkjv@1John:4:9|. John often puts in explanatory comments (1:16-18; strkjv@12:37-41|).
rwp@John:4:29 @{All things that ever I did} (\panta ha epoisa\). {Ha}, not \hosa\ (as many as), no "ever" in the Greek. But a guilty conscience (verse 18f.|) led her to exaggerate a bit. {Can this be the Christ?} (\mti houtos estin ho Christos;\). She is already convinced herself (verses 26f.|), but she puts the question in a hesitant form to avoid arousing opposition. With a woman's intuition she avoided \ouk\ and uses \mti\. She does not take sides, but piques their curiosity.
rwp@John:4:42 @{Not because of thy speaking} (\ouketi dia tn sn lalian\). "No longer because of thy talk," good and effective as that was. \Lalia\ (cf. \lale\) is talk, talkativeness, mode of speech, one's vernacular, used by Jesus of his own speech (John:8:43|). {We have heard} (\akkoamen\). Perfect active indicative of \akou\, their abiding experience. {For ourselves} (\autoi\). Just "ourselves." {The Saviour of the world} (\ho str tou kosmou\). See strkjv@Matthew:1:21| for ssei used of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term \str\ to Jesus again in strkjv@1John:4:14|. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (verse 22|). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (verse 26|) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: "At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah." But why "merely"? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their "Saviour," Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on strkjv@John:4:42|: "That in the first century Messiah was given the title str is not proven." The use of "saviour and god" for Ptolemy in the third century B.C. is well known. "The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East" (Deissmann, _Light_, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke:2:11; strkjv@John:4:42; strkjv@Acts:5:31; strkjv@3:23; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@3:6; strkjv@2Timothy:1:10; strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|). All these are writings of the first century A.D. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world.
rwp@John:5:17 @{Answered} (\apekrinato\). Regular aorist middle indicative of \apokrinomai\, in John here only and verse 19|, elsewhere \apekrith\ as in verse 11|. {My Father} (\ho pater mou\). Not "our Father," claim to peculiar relation to the Father. {Worketh even until now} (\hes arti ergazetai\). Linear present middle indicative, "keeps on working until now" without a break on the Sabbath. Philo points out this fact of the continuous activity of God. Justin Martyr, Origen and others note this fact about God. He made the Sabbath for man's blessing, but cannot observe it himself. {And I work} (\kag ergazomai\). Jesus puts himself on a par with God's activity and thus justifies his healing on the Sabbath.
rwp@John:6:67 @{Would ye also go away?} (\M kai humeis thelete hupagein;\). Jesus puts it with the negative answer (\m\) expected. See strkjv@21:5| where Jesus also uses \m\ in a question. Judas must have shown some sympathy with the disappointed and disappearing crowds. But he kept still. There was possibly restlessness on the part of the other apostles.
rwp@John:7:53 @This verse and through strkjv@8:12| (the passage concerning the woman taken in adultery) is certainly not a genuine part of John's Gospel. The oldest and best MSS. (Aleph A B C L W) do not have it. It first appears in Codex Bezae. Some MSS. put it at the close of John's Gospel and some place it in Luke. It is probably a true story for it is like Jesus, but it does not belong to John's Gospel. The Canterbury Version on which we are commenting puts the passage in brackets. Westcott and Hort place it at the end of the Gospel. With this explanation we shall proceed. {They went} (\eporeuthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \poreuomai\ used as a deponent verb without passive idea. In this context the verb has to refer to the Sanhedrin with a rather pointless contrast to Jesus.
rwp@John:8:14 @{Even if} (\kan\). That is \kai ean\, a condition of the third class with the present active subjunctive \martur\. Jesus means that his own witness concerning himself is true (\althes\) even if it contravenes their technical rules of evidence. He can and does tell the truth all by himself concerning himself. {For I know whence I came and whither I go} (\hoti oida pothen lthon kai pou hupag\). In this terse sentence with two indirect questions Jesus alludes to his pre-existence with the Father before his Incarnation as in strkjv@17:5| and to the return to the Father after the death and resurrection as in strkjv@13:3; strkjv@14:2f|. He again puts both ideas together in one crisp clause in strkjv@16:28| for the apostles who profess to understand him then. But here these Pharisees are blind to the words of Jesus. "But ye know not whence I come nor whither I go" (\humeis de ouk oidate pothen erchomai pou hupag\). He had spoken of his heavenly destiny (7:33|). Jesus alone knew his personal consciousness of his coming from, fellowship with, and return to the Father. Stier (_Words of the Lord Jesus_) argues that one might as well say to the sun, if claiming to be the sun, that it was night, because it bore witness of itself. The answer is the shining of the sun.
rwp@John:9:3 @{But that the works of God should be made manifest in him} (\all' hina phanerthi ta erga tou theou en auti\). Jesus denies both alternatives, and puts God's purpose (\all' hina\ with first aorist subjunctive of \phanero\) as the true solution. It is sometimes true that disease is the result of personal sin as in the man in strkjv@5:14| and parents can hand on the effects of sin to the third and fourth generations, but there are cases free from blame like this. There is comfort for many sufferers in the words of Jesus here.
rwp@John:18:23 @{If I have spoken evil} (\ei kaks elalsa\). Condition of first class (assumed to be true), with \ei\ and aorist active indicative. Jesus had not spoken evilly towards Annas, though he did not here turn the other cheek, one may note. For the sake of argument, Jesus puts it as if he did speak evilly. Then prove it, that is all. {Bear witness of the evil} (\marturson peri tou kakou\). First aorist active imperative of \marture\, to testify. This is the conclusion (apodosis). Jesus is clearly entitled to proof of such a charge if there is any. {But if well} (\ei de kals\). Supply the same verb \elalsa\. The same condition, but with a challenging question as the apodosis. {Smitest} (\dereis\). Old verb \der\, to flay, to skin, to beat, as in strkjv@Matthew:21:35; strkjv@Luke:22:63; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:20| (of an insulting blow in the face as here).
rwp@Luke:3:11 @{Coats} (\chitnas\). The inner and less necessary undergarment. The outer indispensable \himation\ is not mentioned. Note the specific and different message to each class. John puts his finger on the weaknesses of the people right before him.
rwp@Luke:6:4 @{Did take} (\labn\). Second aorist active participle of \lamban\. Not in Mark and Matthew. See strkjv@Matthew:12:1-8; strkjv@Mark:2:23-28| for discussion of details about the shewbread and the five arguments in defence of his conduct on the sabbath (example of David, work of the priests on the sabbath, prophecy of strkjv@Hosea:6:6|, purpose of the sabbath for man, the Son of Man lord of the sabbath). It was an overwhelming and crushing reply to these pettifogging ceremonialists to which they could not reply, but which increased their anger. Codex D transfers verse 5| to after verse 10| and puts here the following: "On the same day beholding one working on the sabbath he said to him: Man, if you know what you are doing, happy are you; but if you do not know, cursed are you and a transgressor of the law."
rwp@Luke:6:11 @{They were filled with madness} (\eplsthsan anoias\) First aorist passive (effective) with genitive: In strkjv@5:26| we saw the people filled with fear. Here is rage that is kin to insanity, for \anoias\ is lack of sense (\a\ privative and \nous\, mind). An old word, but only here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:9| in the N.T. {Communed} (\dielaloun\), imperfect active, picturing their excited counsellings with one another. strkjv@Mark:3:6| notes that they bolted out of the synagogue and outside plotted even with the Herodians how to destroy Jesus, strange co-conspirators these against the common enemy. {What they might do to Jesus} (\ti an poisaien Isou\). Luke puts it in a less damaging way than strkjv@Mark:3:6; strkjv@Matthew:12:14|. This aorist optative with \an\ is the deliberative question like that in strkjv@Acts:17:18| retained in the indirect form here. Perhaps Luke means, not that they were undecided about killing Jesus, but only as to the best way of doing it. Already nearly two years before the end we see the set determination to destroy Jesus. We see it here in Galilee. We have already seen it at the feast in Jerusalem (John:5:18|) where "the Jews sought the more to kill him." John and the Synoptics are in perfect agreement as to the Pharisaic attitude toward Jesus.
rwp@Luke:7:6 @{Went with them} (\eporeueto sun autois\). Imperfect indicative middle. He started to go along with them. {Now} (\d\). Already like Latin _jam_. In strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8| \nun d\ like _jam nunc_. {Sent friends} (\epempsen philous\). This second embassy also, wanting in Matthew's narrative. He "puts the message of both into the mouth of the centurion himself" (Plummer). Note saying (\legn\), present active singular participle, followed by direct quotation from the centurion himself. {Trouble not thyself} (\M skullou\). Present middle (direct use) imperative of \skull\, old verb originally meaning to skin, to mangle, and then in later Greek to vex, trouble, annoy. Frequent in the papyri in this latter sense. {For I am not worthy that} (\ou gar hikanos eimi hina\). The same word \hikanos\, not \axios\, as in strkjv@Matthew:8:8|, which see for discussion, from \hik, hikan\, to fit, to reach, be adequate for. \Hina\ in both places as common in late Greek. See strkjv@Matthew:8:8| also for "roof" (\stegn\, covering).
rwp@Luke:7:39 @{This man} (\houtos\). Contemptuous, this fellow. {If he were a (the) prophet} (\ei n [ho] prophts\). Condition of the second class, determined as unfulfilled. The Pharisee assumes that Jesus is not a prophet (or the prophet, reading of B, that he claims to be). A Greek condition puts the thing from the standpoint of the speaker or writer. It does not deal with the actual facts, but only with the statement about the facts. {Would have perceived} (\eginsken an\). Wrong translation, would now perceive or know (which he assumes that Jesus does not do). The protasis is false and the conclusion also. He is wrong in both. The conclusion (apodosis), like the condition, deals here with the present situation and so both use the imperfect indicative (\an\ in the conclusion, a mere device for making it plain that it is not a condition of the first class). {Who and what manner of woman} (\tis kai potap h gun\). She was notorious in person and character.
rwp@Luke:9:33 @{As they were departing from him} (\en ti diachrizesthai autous ap' autou\). Peculiar to Luke and another instance of Luke's common idiom of \en\ with the articular infinitive in a temporal clause. This common verb occurs here only in the N.T. The present middle voice means to separate oneself fully (direct middle). This departing of Moses and Elijah apparently accompanied Peter's remark as given in all three Gospels. See for details on Mark and Matthew. {Master} (\Epistata\) here, {Rabbi} (Mark:9:5|), {Lord} (\Kurie\, strkjv@Matthew:17:4|). {Let us make} (\poismen\, first aorist active subjunctive) as in strkjv@Mark:9:5|, but strkjv@Matthew:17:4| has "I will make" (\pois\). It was near the time of the feast of the tabernacles. Songs:Peter proposes that they celebrate it up here instead of going to Jerusalem for it as they did a bit later (John:7|). {Not knowing what he said} (\m eids ho legei\). Literally, {not understanding what he was saying} (\m\, regular negative with participle and \legei\, present indicative retained in relative clause in indirect discourse). Luke puts it more bluntly than Mark (Peter's account), "For he wist not what to answer; for they became sore afraid" (Mark:9:6|). Peter acted according to his impulsive nature and spoke up even though he did not know what to say or even what he was saying when he spoke. He was only half awake as Luke explains and he was sore afraid as Mark (Peter) explains. He had bewilderment enough beyond a doubt, but it was Peter who spoke, not James and John.
rwp@Luke:14:5 @{An ass or an ox} (\onos bous\). But Westcott and Hort \huios bous\ ({a son or an ox}). The manuscripts are much divided between \huios\ (son) and \onos\ (ass) which in the abbreviated uncials looked much alike (TC, OC) and were much alike. The sentence in the Greek reads literally thus: Whose ox or ass of you shall fall (\peseitai\, future middle of \pipto\) into a well and he (the man) will not straightway draw him up (\anaspasei\, future active of \anaspa\) on the sabbath day? The very form of the question is a powerful argument and puts the lawyers and the Pharisees hopelessly on the defensive.
rwp@Luke:20:2 @{Tell us} (\eipon hmin\). Luke adds these words to what Mark and Matthew have. Second aorist active imperative for the old form \eipe\ and with ending \-on\ of the first aorist active. Westcott and Hort punctuate the rest of the sentence as an indirect question after \eipon\, but the Revised Version puts a semicolon after "us" and retains the direct question. The Greek manuscripts have no punctuation.
rwp@Luke:23:16 @{Chastise} (\paideusas\). First aorist active participle of \paideu\, to train a child (\pais\), and then, as a part of the training, punishment. Our English word chasten is from the Latin _castus_, pure, chaste, and means to purify (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:12:6f.|). Perhaps Pilate may have split a hair over the word as Wycliff puts it: "I shall deliver him amended." But, if Jesus was innocent, Pilate had no doubt to "chastise" him to satisfy a mob. Verse 17| is omitted by Westcott and Hort as from strkjv@Mark:15:6; strkjv@Matthew:27:15|.
rwp@Mark:1:29 @{The house of Simon and Andrew} (\tn oikian Simnos kai Andreou\). Peter was married and both he and Andrew lived together in "Peter's house" (Matthew:8:14|) with Peter's wife and mother-in-law. Peter was evidently married before he began to follow Jesus. Later his wife accompanied him on his apostolic journeys (1Corinthians:9:5|). This incident followed immediately after the service in the synagogue on the sabbath. All the Synoptics give it. Mark heard Peter tell it as it occurred in his own house where Jesus made his home while in Capernaum. Each Gospel gives touches of its own to the story. Mark has "lay sick of a fever " (\katekeito puressousa\), lay prostrate burning with fever. Matthew puts it "stretched out (\beblmenn\) with a fever." Luke has it "holden with a great fever" (\n sunechomen pureti megali\), a technical medical phrase. They all mention the instant recovery and ministry without any convalescence. Mark and Matthew speak of the touch of Jesus on her hand and Luke speaks of Jesus standing over her like a doctor. It was a tender scene.
rwp@Mark:1:45 @{Began to publish it much} (\rxato krussein polla\). strkjv@Luke:5:15| puts it, "so much the more" (\mllon\). One of the best ways to spread a thing is to tell people not to tell. It was certainly so in this case. Soon Jesus had to avoid cities and betake himself to desert places to avoid the crowds and even then people kept coming to Jesus (\rchonto\, imperfect tense). Some preachers are not so disturbed by the onrush of crowds.
rwp@Mark:3:3 @{Stand forth} (\egeire eis to meson\). Step into the middle of the room where all can see. It was a bold defiance of the Christ's spying enemies. Wycliff rightly puts it: {They aspieden him}. They played the spy on Jesus. One can see the commotion among the long-bearded hypocrites at this daring act of Jesus.
rwp@Mark:5:7 @{I adjure thee by God} (\horkiz se ton theon\). The demoniac puts Jesus on oath (two accusatives) after the startled outcry just like the one in strkjv@1:24|, which see. He calls Jesus here "son of the Most High God" (\huie tou theou tou hupsistou\) as in strkjv@Luke:8:28| (cf. strkjv@Genesis:14:18f.|). {Torment me not} (\m me basanisis\). Prohibition with \m\ and the ingressive aorist subjunctive. The word means to test metals and then to test one by torture (cf. our "third degree"). Same word in all three Gospels.
rwp@Mark:9:23 @{If thou canst} (\to ei duni\). The Greek has a neat idiom not preserved in the English translation. The article takes up the very words of the man and puts the clause in the accusative case of general reference. "As to the 'if thou canst,' all things can (\dunata\) to the one who believes." The word for "possible" is \dunata\, the same root as \duni\ (canst). This quick turn challenges the father's faith. On this use of the Greek article see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 766.
rwp@Mark:11:26 @This verse is omitted by Westcott and Hort. The Revised Version puts it in a footnote.
rwp@Mark:11:32 @{But should we say} (\alla eipmen\). Deliberative subjunctive with aorist active subjunctive again. It is possible to supply \ean\ from verse 31| and treat it as a condition as there. Songs:Matthew:21:26| and strkjv@Luke:20:6|. But in Mark the structure continues rugged after "from men" with anacoluthon or even aposiopesis--"they feared the people" Mark adds. Matthew has it: "We fear the multitude." Luke puts it: "all the people will stone us." All three Gospels state the popular view of John as a prophet. Mark's "verily" is \onts\ really, actually. They feared John though dead as much as Herod Antipas did. His martyrdom had deepened his power over the people and disrespect towards his memory now might raise a storm (Swete).
rwp@Mark:12:24 @{Is it not for this cause that ye err?} (\Ou dia touto plansthe;\). Mark puts it as a question with \ou\ expecting the affirmative answer. Matthew puts it as a positive assertion: "Ye are." \Planaomai\ is to wander astray (cf. our word _planet_, wandering stars, \asteres plantai\, strkjv@Jude:1:13|) like the Latin _errare_ (our _error_, err). {That ye know not the scriptures} (\m eidotes tas graphas\). The Sadducees posed as men of superior intelligence and knowledge in opposition to the traditionalists among the Pharisees with their oral law. And yet on this very point they were ignorant of the Scriptures. How much error today is due to this same ignorance among the educated! {Nor the power of God} (\mde tn dunamin tou theou\). The two kinds of ignorance generally go together (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15:34|).
rwp@Mark:12:28 @{Heard them questioning together} (\akousas autn sunztountn\). The victory of Christ over the Sadducees pleased the Pharisees who now had come back with mixed emotions over the new turn of things (Matthew:22:34|). strkjv@Luke:20:39| represents one of the scribes as commending Jesus for his skilful reply to the Sadducees. Mark here puts this scribe in a favourable light, "knowing that he had answered them well" (\eids hoti kals apekrith autois\). "Them" here means the Sadducees. But strkjv@Matthew:22:35| says that this lawyer (\nomikos\) was "tempting" (\peirazn\) by his question. "A few, among whom was the scribe, were constrained to admire, even if they were willing to criticize, the Rabbi who though not himself a Pharisee, surpassed the Pharisees as a champion of the truth." That is a just picture of this lawyer. {The first of all} (\prt pantn\). First in rank and importance. strkjv@Matthew:22:36| has "great" (\megal\). See discussion there. Probably Jesus spoke in Aramaic. "First" and "great" in Greek do not differ essentially here. Mark quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:4f.| as it stands in the LXX and also strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. strkjv@Matthew:22:40| adds the summary: "On these two commandments hangeth (\krematai\) the whole law and the prophets."
rwp@Matthew:1:18 @{Of the Holy Ghost} (\ek pneumatos hagiou\). The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She "was found with child" (\heureth en gastri echousa\). This way of putting it, the usual Greek idiom, plainly shows that it was the discovery that shocked Joseph. He did not as yet know what Matthew plainly asserts that the Holy Ghost, not Joseph and not any man, was responsible for the pregnancy of Mary. The problem of the Virgin Birth of Jesus has been a disturbing fact to some through all the ages and is today to those who do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ, the Son of God, before his Incarnation on earth. This is the primal fact about the Birth of Christ. The Incarnation of Christ is clearly stated by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|; and involved in strkjv@Colossians:1:15-19|) and by John (John:1:14; strkjv@17:5|). If one frankly admits the actual pre-existence of Christ and the real Incarnation, he has taken the longest and most difficult step in the matter of the supernatural Birth of Christ. That being true, no merely human birth without the supernatural element can possibly explain the facts. Incarnation is far more than the Indwelling of God by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. To admit real incarnation and also full human birth, both father and mother, creates a greater difficulty than to admit the Virgin Birth of Jesus begotten by the Holy Spirit, as Matthew here says, and born of the Virgin Mary. It is true that only Matthew and Luke tell the story of the supernatural birth of Jesus, though strkjv@John:1:14| seems to refer to it. Mark has nothing whatever concerning the birth and childhood of Jesus and so cannot be used as a witness on the subject. Both Matthew and Luke present the birth of Jesus as not according to ordinary human birth. Jesus had no human father. There is such a thing in nature as parthenogenesis in the lower orders of life. But that scientific fact has no bearing here. We see here God sending his Son into the world to be the world's Saviour and he gave him a human mother, but not a human father so that Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of Man, the God Man. Matthew tells the story of the birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph as Luke gives it from the standpoint of Mary. The two narratives harmonize with each other. One credits these most wonderful of all birth narratives according as he believes in the love and power of Almighty God to do what he wills. There is no miracle with God who has all power and all knowledge. The laws of nature are simply the expression of God's will, but he has not revealed all his will in the laws that we discover. God is Spirit. He is Person. He holds in his own power all life. strkjv@John:3:16| is called the Little Gospel because it puts briefly the love of God for men in sending his own Son to live and die for us.
rwp@Matthew:1:21 @{Thou shalt call his name Jesus} (\Kalesies to onoma autou Isoun\). The rabbis named six whose names were given before birth: "Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and the name of the Messiah, whom may the Holy One, blessed be His name, bring in our day." The angel puts it up to Joseph as the putative father to name the child. "Jesus is the same as Joshua, a contraction of Jehoshuah (Numbers:13:16; strkjv@1Chronicles:7:27|), signifying in Hebrew, 'Jehovah is helper,' or 'Help of Jehovah'" (Broadus). Songs:Jesus is the Greek form of Joshua (Hebrews:4:8|). He is another Joshua to lead the true people of God into the Promised Land. The name itself was common enough as Josephus shows. Jehovah is Salvation as seen in Joshua for the Hebrews and in Jesus for all believers. "The meaning of the name, therefore, finds expression in the title _Saviour_ applied to our Lord (Luke:1:47; strkjv@2:11; strkjv@John:4:42|)" (Vincent). He will save (\ssei\) his people from their sins and so be their Saviour (\Str\). He will be prophet, priest, and king, but "Saviour" sums it all up in one word. The explanation is carried out in the promise, "for he is the one who (\autos\) will save (\ssei\ with a play on the name Jesus) his people from their sins." Paul will later explain that by the covenant people, the children of promise, God means the spiritual Israel, all who believe whether Jews or Gentiles. This wonderful word touches the very heart of the mission and message of the Messiah. Jesus himself will show that the kingdom of heaven includes all those and only those who have the reign of God in their hearts and lives. {From their sins} (\apo tn hamartin autn\). Both sins of omission and of commission. The substantive (\hamartia\) is from the verb (\hamartanein\) and means missing the mark as with an arrow. How often the best of us fall short and fail to score. Jesus will save us away from (\apo\) as well as out of (\ex\) our sins. They will be cast into oblivion and he will cover them up out of sight.
rwp@Matthew:2:2 @{For we saw his star in the east} (\eidomen gar autou ton astera en ti anatoli\). This does not mean that they saw the star which was in the east. That would make them go east to follow it instead of west from the east. The words "in the east" are probably to be taken with "we saw" i.e. we were in the east when we saw it, or still more probably "we saw his star at its rising" or "when it rose" as Moffatt puts it. The singular form here (\ti anatoli\) does sometimes mean "east" (Revelation:21:13|), though the plural is more common as in strkjv@Matthew:2:1|. In strkjv@Luke:1:78| the singular means dawn as the verb (\aneteilen\) does in strkjv@Matthew:4:16| (Septuagint). The Magi ask where is the one born king of the Jews. They claim that they had seen his star, either a miracle or a combination of bright stars or a comet. These men may have been Jewish proselytes and may have known of the Messianic hope, for even Vergil had caught a vision of it. The whole world was on tiptoe of expectancy for something. Moulton (_Journal of Theological Studies_, 1902, p. 524) "refers to the Magian belief that a star could be the _fravashi_, the counterpart or angel (cf. strkjv@Matthew:18:10|) of a great man" (McNeile). They came to worship the newly born king of the Jews. Seneca (_Epistle_ 58) tells of Magians who came to Athens with sacrifices to Plato after his death. They had their own way of concluding that the star which they had seen pointed to the birth of this Messianic king. Cicero (_Deuteronomy:Divin_. i. 47) "refers to the constellation from which, on the birthnight of Alexander, Magians foretold that the destroyer of Asia was born" (McNeile). Alford is positive that no miracle is intended by the report of the Magi or by Matthew in his narrative. But one must be allowed to say that the birth of Jesus, if really God's only Son who has become Incarnate, is the greatest of all miracles. Even the methods of astrologers need not disturb those who are sure of this fact.
rwp@Matthew:2:12 @{Warned in a dream} (\chrmatisthentes kat' onar\). The verb means to transact business (\chrmatiz\ from \chrma\, and that from \chraomai\, to use. Then to consult, to deliberate, to make answer as of magistrates or an oracle, to instruct, to admonish. In the Septuagint and the New Testament it occurs with the idea of being warned by God and also in the papyri (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 122). Wycliff puts it here: "An answer taken in sleep."
rwp@Matthew:4:1 @{To be tempted of the devil} (\peirasthnai hupo tou diabolou\). Matthew locates the temptation at a definite time, "then" (\tote\) and place, "into the wilderness" (\eis tn ermon\), the same general region where John was preaching. It is not surprising that Jesus was tempted by the devil immediately after his baptism which signified the formal entrance upon the Messianic work. That is a common experience with ministers who step out into the open for Christ. The difficulty here is that Matthew says that "Jesus was led up into the wilderness by the Spirit to be tempted by the devil." Mark (Mark:1:12|) puts it more strongly that the Spirit "drives" (\ekballei\) Christ into the wilderness. It was a strong impulsion by the Holy Spirit that led Jesus into the wilderness to think through the full significance of the great step that he had now taken. That step opened the door for the devil and involved inevitable conflict with the slanderer (\tou diabolou\). Judas has this term applied to him (John:6:70|) as it is to men (2Timothy:3:3; strkjv@Titus:2:3|) and women (she devils, strkjv@1Timothy:3:11|) who do the work of the arch slanderer. There are those today who do not believe that a personal devil exists, but they do not offer an adequate explanation of the existence and presence of sin in the world. Certainly Jesus did not discount or deny the reality of the devil's presence. The word "tempt" here (\peiraz\) and in strkjv@4:3| means originally to test, to try. That is its usual meaning in the ancient Greek and in the Septuagint. Bad sense of \ekpeiraz\ in strkjv@4:7| as in strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:16|. Here it comes to mean, as often in the New Testament, to solicit to sin. The evil sense comes from its use for an evil purpose.
rwp@Matthew:4:5 @{Then the devil taketh him} (\tote paralambanei auton ho diabolos\). Matthew is very fond of this temporal adverb (\tote\). See already strkjv@2:7; strkjv@3:13; strkjv@4:1,5|. Note historic present with vivid picturesqueness. Luke puts this temptation third, the geographical order. But was the person of Christ allowed to be at the disposal of the devil during these temptations? Alford so holds. {On the pinnacle of the temple} (\epi to pterugion tou hierou\). Literally "wing:" the English word "pinnacle" is from the Latin _pinnaculum_, a diminutive of _pinna_ (wing). "_The temple_" (\tou hierou\) here includes the whole temple area, not just the sanctuary (\ho naos\), the Holy Place and Most Holy Place. It is not clear what place is meant by "wing." It may refer to Herod's royal portico which overhung the Kedron Valley and looked down some four hundred and fifty feet, a dizzy height (Josephus, _Ant_. XV. xi. 5). This was on the south of the temple court. Hegesippus says that James the Lord's brother was later placed on the wing of the temple and thrown down therefrom.
rwp@Matthew:4:9 @{All these things will I give thee} (\tauta soi panta ds\). The devil claims the rule of the world, not merely of Palestine or of the Roman Empire. "The kingdoms of the cosmos" (4:8|) were under his sway. This word for world brings out the orderly arrangement of the universe while \h oikoumen\ presents the inhabited earth. Jesus does not deny the grip of the devil on the world of men, but the condition (\ean\ and aorist subjunctive, second class undetermined with likelihood of determination), was spurned by Jesus. As Matthew has it Jesus is plainly to "fall down and worship me" (\pesn prokunsis moi\), while Luke (Luke:4:7|) puts it, "worship before me" (\enpion emou\), a less offensive demand, but one that really involved worship of the devil. The ambition of Jesus is thus appealed to at the price of recognition of the devil's primacy in the world. It was compromise that involved surrender of the Son of God to the world ruler of this darkness. "The temptation was threefold: to gain a temporal, not a spiritual, dominion; to gain it at once; and to gain it by an act of homage to the ruler of this world, which would make the self-constituted Messiah the vice-regent of the devil and not of God" (McNeile).
rwp@Matthew:4:24 @{The report of him went forth into all Syria} (\aplthen h ako autou eis holn tn Syrian\). Rumour (\ako\) carries things almost like the wireless or radio. The Gentiles all over Syria to the north heard of what was going on in Galilee. The result was inevitable. Jesus had a moving hospital of patients from all over Galilee and Syria. "{Those that were sick}" (\tous kaks echontas\), literally "those who had it bad," cases that the doctors could not cure. "{Holden with divers diseases and torments}" (\poikilais nosois kai basanois sunechomenous\). "Held together" or "compressed" is the idea of the participle. The same word is used by Jesus in strkjv@Luke:12:50| and by Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| and of the crowd pressing on Jesus (Luke:8:45|). They brought these difficult and chronic cases (present tense of the participle here) to Jesus. Instead of "divers" say "various" (\poikilais\) like fever, leprosy, blindness. The adjective means literally many colored or variegated like flowers, paintings, jaundice, etc. Some had "torments" (\basanois\). The word originally (oriental origin) meant a touchstone, "Lydian stone" used for testing gold because pure gold rubbed on it left a peculiar mark. Then it was used for examination by torture. Sickness was often regarded as "torture." These diseases are further described "in a descending scale of violence" (McNeile) as "demoniacs, lunatics, and paralytics" as Moffatt puts it, "demoniacs, epileptics, paralytics" as Weymouth has it, (\daimonizomenous kai selniazomenous kai paralutikous\), people possessed by demons, lunatics or "moon-struck" because the epileptic seizures supposedly followed the phases of the moon (Bruce) as shown also in strkjv@Matthew:17:15|, paralytics (our very word). Our word "lunatic" is from the Latin _luna_ (moon) and carries the same picture as the Greek \selniazomai\ from \seln\ (moon). These diseases are called "torments."
rwp@Matthew:5:3 @{Blessed} (\makarioi\). The English word "blessed" is more exactly represented by the Greek verbal \eulogtoi\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:68| of God by Zacharias, or the perfect passive participle \eulogmenos\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:42| of Mary by Elizabeth and in strkjv@Matthew:21:9|. Both forms come from \euloge\, to speak well of (\eu, logos\). The Greek word here (\makarioi\) is an adjective that means "happy" which in English etymology goes back to hap, chance, good-luck as seen in our words haply, hapless, happily, happiness. "Blessedness is, of course, an infinitely higher and better thing than mere happiness" (Weymouth). English has thus ennobled "blessed" to a higher rank than "happy." But "happy" is what Jesus said and the _Braid Scots New Testament_ dares to say "Happy" each time here as does the _Improved Edition of the American Bible Union Version_. The Greek word is as old as Homer and Pindar and was used of the Greek gods and also of men, but largely of outward prosperity. Then it is applied to the dead who died in the Lord as in strkjv@Revelation:14:13|. Already in the Old Testament the Septuagint uses it of moral quality. "Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love" (Vincent). Jesus takes this word "happy" and puts it in this rich environment. "This is one of the words which have been transformed and ennobled by New Testament use; by association, as in the Beatitudes, with unusual conditions, accounted by the world miserable, or with rare and difficult" (Bruce). It is a pity that we have not kept the word "happy" to the high and holy plane where Jesus placed it. "If you know these things, happy (\makarioi\) are you if you do them" (John:13:17|). "Happy (\makarioi\) are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John:20:29|). And Paul applies this adjective to God, "according to the gospel of the glory of the happy (\makariou\) God" (1Timothy:1:11|. Cf. also strkjv@Titus:2:13|). The term "Beatitudes" (Latin _beatus_) comes close to the meaning of Christ here by \makarioi\. It will repay one to make a careful study of all the "beatitudes" in the New Testament where this word is employed. It occurs nine times here (3-11|), though the beatitudes in verses 10 and 11 are very much alike. The copula is not expressed in either of these nine beatitudes. In each case a reason is given for the beatitude, "for" (\hoti\), that shows the spiritual quality involved. Some of the phrases employed by Jesus here occur in the Psalms, some even in the Talmud (itself later than the New Testament, though of separate origin). That is of small moment. "The originality of Jesus lies in putting the due value on these thoughts, collecting them, and making them as prominent as the Ten Commandments. No greater service can be rendered to mankind than to rescue from obscurity neglected moral commonplaces " (Bruce). Jesus repeated his sayings many times as all great teachers and preachers do, but this sermon has unity, progress, and consummation. It does not contain all that Jesus taught by any means, but it stands out as the greatest single sermon of all time, in its penetration, pungency, and power. {The poor in spirit} (\hoi ptchoi ti pneumati\). Luke has only "the poor," but he means the same by it as this form in Matthew, "the pious in Israel, for the most part poor, whom the worldly rich despised and persecuted" (McNeile). The word used here (\ptchoi\) is applied to the beggar Lazarus in strkjv@Luke:16:20,22| and suggests spiritual destitution (from \ptss\ to crouch, to cower). The other word \pens\ is from \penomai\, to work for one's daily bread and so means one who works for his living. The word \ptchos\ is more frequent in the New Testament and implies deeper poverty than \pens\. "The kingdom of heaven" here means the reign of God in the heart and life. This is the _summum bonum_ and is what matters most.
rwp@Matthew:5:19 @{Shall do and teach} (\poisi kai didaxi\). Jesus puts practice before preaching. The teacher must apply the doctrine to himself before he is qualified to teach others. The scribes and Pharisees were men who "say and do not" (Matthew:23:3|), who preach but do not perform. This is Christ's test of greatness.
rwp@Matthew:5:39 @{Resist not him that is evil} (\me antistnai ti ponri\). Here again it is the infinitive (second aorist active) in indirect command. But is it "the evil man" or the "evil deed"? The dative case is the same form for masculine and neuter. Weymouth puts it "not to resist a (the) wicked man," Moffatt "not to resist an injury," Goodspeed "not to resist injury." The examples will go with either view. Jesus protested when smitten on the cheek (John:18:22|). And Jesus denounced the Pharisees (Matthew:23|) and fought the devil always. The language of Jesus is bold and picturesque and is not to be pressed too literally. Paradoxes startle and make us think. We are expected to fill in the other side of the picture. One thing certainly is meant by Jesus and that is that personal revenge is taken out of our hands, and that applies to "lynch-law." Aggressive or offensive war by nations is also condemned, but not necessarily defensive war or defence against robbery and murder. Professional pacifism may be mere cowardice.
rwp@Matthew:7:12 @{That men should do unto you} (\hina poisin hmn hoi anthrpoi\). Luke (Luke:6:31|) puts the Golden Rule parallel with strkjv@Matthew:5:42|. The negative form is in Tobit strkjv@4:15. It was used by Hillel, Philo, Isocrates, Confucius. "The Golden Rule is the distilled essence of that 'fulfilment' (5:17|) which is taught in the sermon" (McNeile). Jesus puts it in positive form.
rwp@Matthew:8:17 @{Himself took our infirmities and bare our diseases} (\autos tas astheneias elaben kai tas nosous ebastasen\). A quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:53:4|. It is not clear in what sense Matthew applies the words in Isaiah whether in the precise sense of the Hebrew or in an independent manner. Moffatt translates it: "He took away our sicknesses, and bore the burden of our diseases." Goodspeed puts it: "He took our sickness and carried away our diseases." Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 102f.) thinks that Matthew has made a free interpretation of the Hebrew, has discarded the translation of the Septuagint, and has transposed the two Hebrew verbs so that Matthew means: "He took upon himself our pains, and bore our diseases." Plummer holds that "It is impossible, and also unnecessary, to understand what the Evangelist understood by 'took ' (\elaben\) and 'bare' (\ebastasen\). It at least must mean that Christ removed their sufferings from the sufferers. He can hardly have meant that the diseases were transferred to Christ." \Bastaz\ occurs freely in the papyri with the sense of lift, carry, endure, carry away (the commonest meaning, Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_), pilfer. In strkjv@Matthew:3:11| we have the common vernacular use to take off sandals. The Attic Greek did not use it in the sense of carrying off. "This passage is the cornerstone of the faith-cure theory, which claims that the atonement of Christ includes provision for _bodily_ no less than for spiritual healing, and therefore insists on translating 'took away'" (Vincent). We have seen that the word \bastaz\ will possibly allow that meaning, but I agree with McNeile: "The passage, _as Mt. employs it_, has no bearing on the doctrine of the atonement." But Jesus does show his sympathy with us. "Christ's sympathy with the sufferers was so intense that he really felt their weaknesses and pains." In our burdens Jesus steps under the load with us and helps us to carry on.
rwp@Matthew:10:10 @{No wallet} (\m pran\). Better than "scrip." It can be either a travelling or bread bag. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 108f.) shows that it can mean the beggar's collecting bag as in an inscription on a monument at Kefr Hanar in Syria: "While Christianity was still young the beggar priest was making his rounds in the land of Syria on behalf of the national goddess." Deissmann also quotes a pun in the _Didaskalia=Const. Apost_. 3, 6 about some itinerant widows who said that they were not so much \chrai\ (spouseless) as \prai\ (pouchless). He cites also Shakespeare, _Troilus and Cressida_ III. iii. 145: "Time hath, my lord, a wallet at his back, wherein he puts alms for oblivion." {For the labourer is worthy of his food} (\axios gar ho ergats ts trophs autou\). The sermon is worth the dinner, in other words. Luke in the charge to the seventy (Luke:10:7|) has the same words with \misthou\ (reward) instead of \trophs\ (food). In strkjv@1Timothy:5:18| Paul quotes Luke's form as scripture (\h graph\) or as a well-known saying if confined to the first quotation. The word for workman here (\ergats\) is that used by Jesus in the prayer for labourers (Matthew:9:38|). The well-known _Didach_ or _Teaching of the Twelve_ (xiii) shows that in the second century there was still a felt need for care on the subject of receiving pay for preaching. The travelling sophists added also to the embarrassment of the situation. The wisdom of these restrictions was justified in Galilee at this time. Mark (Mark:6:6-13|) and Luke (Luke:9:1-6|) vary slightly from Matthew in some of the details of the instructions of Jesus.
rwp@Matthew:10:23 @{Till the Son of man be come} (\hes elthi ho huios tou anthrpou\). Moffatt puts it "before the Son of man arrives" as if Jesus referred to this special tour of Galilee. Jesus could overtake them. Possibly so, but it is by no means clear. Some refer it to the Transfiguration, others to the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, others to the Second Coming. Some hold that Matthew has put the saying in the wrong context. Others bluntly say that Jesus was mistaken, a very serious charge to make in his instructions to these preachers. The use of \hes\ with aorist subjunctive for a future event is a good Greek idiom.
rwp@Matthew:11:29 @{Take my yoke upon you and learn of me} (\arate ton zugon mou eph'humas kai mathete ap'emou\). The rabbis used yoke for school as many pupils find it now a yoke. The English word "school" is Greek for leisure (\schol\). But Jesus offers refreshment (\anapausin\) in his school and promises to make the burden light, for he is a meek and humble teacher. Humility was not a virtue among the ancients. It was ranked with servility. Jesus has made a virtue of this vice. He has glorified this attitude so that Paul urges it (Phillipians:2:3|), "in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself." In portions of Europe today people place yokes on the shoulders to make the burden easier to carry. Jesus promises that we shall find the yoke kindly and the burden lightened by his help. "Easy" is a poor translation of \chrstos\. Moffatt puts it "kindly." That is the meaning in the Septuagint for persons. We have no adjective that quite carries the notion of kind and good. The yoke of Christ is useful, good, and kindly. Cf. strkjv@Songs:1:10|.
rwp@Matthew:13:3 @{Many things in parables} (\polla en parabolais\). It was not the first time that Jesus had used parables, but the first time that he had spoken so many and some of such length. He will use a great many in the future as in Luke 12 to 18 and Matt. 24 and 25. The parables already mentioned in Matthew include the salt and the light (5:13-16|), the birds and the lilies (6:26-30|), the splinter and the beam in the eye (7:3-5|), the two gates (7:13f.|), the wolves in sheep's clothing (7:15|), the good and bad trees (7:17-19|), the wise and foolish builders (7:24-27|), the garment and the wineskins (9:16f.|), the children in the market places (11:16f.|). It is not certain how many he spoke on this occasion. Matthew mentions eight in this chapter (the Sower, the Tares, the Mustard Seed, the Leaven, the Hid Treasure, the Pearl of Great Price, the Net, the Householder). Mark adds the Parable of the Lamp (Mark:4:21; strkjv@Luke:8:16|), the Parable of the Seed Growing of Itself (Mark:4:26-29|), making ten of which we know. But both Mark (Mark:4:33|) and Matthew (13:34|) imply that there were many others. "Without a parable spake he nothing unto them" (Matthew:13:34|), on this occasion, we may suppose. The word parable (\parabol\ from \paraball\, to place alongside for measurement or comparison like a yardstick) is an objective illustration for spiritual or moral truth. The word is employed in a variety of ways (a) as for sententious sayings or proverbs (Matthew:15:15; strkjv@Mark:3:23; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@5:36-39; strkjv@6:39|), for a figure or type (Heb. strkjv@9:9; strkjv@11:19|); (b) a comparison in the form of a narrative, the common use in the Synoptic Gospels like the Sower; (c) "A narrative illustration not involving a comparison" (Broadus), like the Rich Fool, the Good Samaritan, etc. "The oriental genius for picturesque speech found expression in a multitude of such utterances" (McNeile). There are parables in the Old Testament, in the Talmud, in sermons in all ages. But no one has spoken such parables as these of Jesus. They hold the mirror up to nature and, as all illustrations should do, throw light on the truth presented. The fable puts things as they are not in nature, Aesop's Fables, for instance. The parable may not be actual fact, but it could be so. It is harmony with the nature of the case. The allegory (\allgoria\) is a speaking parable that is self-explanatory all along like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_. All allegories are parables, but not all parables are allegories. The Prodigal Son is an allegory, as is the story of the Vine and Branches (John:15|). John does not use the word parable, but only \paroimia\, a saying by the way (John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). As a rule the parables of Jesus illustrate one main point and the details are more or less incidental, though sometimes Jesus himself explains these. When he does not do so, we should be slow to interpret the minor details. Much heresy has come from fantastic interpretations of the parables. In the case of the Parable of the Sower (13:3-8|) we have also the careful exposition of the story by Jesus (18-23|) as well as the reason for the use of parables on this occasion by Jesus (9-17|).
rwp@Matthew:14:6 @{When Herod's birthday came} (\genesiois genomenois tou Hridou\). Locative of time (cf. strkjv@Mark:6:21|) without the genitive absolute. The earlier Greeks used the word \genesia\ for funeral commemorations (birthdays of the dead), \genethlia\ being the word for birthday celebrations of living persons. But that distinction has disappeared in the papyri. The word \genesia\ in the papyri (_Fayum Towns_, 114-20, 115-8, 119-30) is always a birthday feast as here in Matthew and Mark. Philo used both words of birthday feasts. Persius, a Roman satirist (_Sat_. V. 180-183), describes a banquet on Herod's Day. {Danced in the midst} (\rchsato en ti mesi\). This was Salome, daughter of Herodias by her first marriage. The root of the verb means some kind of rapid motion. "Leaped in the middle," Wycliff puts it. It was a shameful exhibition of lewd dancing prearranged by Herodias to compass her purpose for John's death. Salome had stooped to the level of an \almeh\, or common dancer.
rwp@Matthew:17:1 @{After six days} (\meth' hmers hex\). This could be on the sixth day, but as Luke (Luke:9:28|) puts it "about eight days" one naturally thinks of a week as the probable time, though it is not important. {Taketh with him} (\paralambanei\). Literally, {takes along}. Note historical present. These three disciples form an inner group who have shown more understanding of Jesus. Songs:at Gethsemane. {Apart} (\kat' idian\) means "by themselves" ({alone}, \monous\, Mark has it) up (\anapherei\) into a high mountain, probably Mount Hermon again, though we do not really know. "The Mount of Transfiguration does not concern geography" (Holtzmann).
rwp@Matthew:21:42 @{The stone which} (\lithon hon\). Inverse attraction of the antecedent into the case of the relative. {The builders rejected} (\apedokimasan hoi oikodomountes\). From strkjv@Psalms:118:22|. A most telling quotation. These experts in building God's temple had rejected the corner-stone chosen by God for his own house. But God has the last word and sets aside the building experts and puts his Son as the Head of the corner. It was a withering indictment.
rwp@Philippians:2:13 @{Which worketh in you} (\ho energn en humin\). Articular present active participle of \energe\ from \energos\ (\en, ergon\) one at work, common verb from Aristotle on, to be at work, to energize. God is the Energy and the Energizer of the universe. Modern scientists, like Eddington, Jeans, and Whitney, are not afraid to agree with Paul and to put God back of all activity in nature. {Both to will and to work} (\kai to thelein kai to energein\). "Both the willing and the working (the energizing)." God does it all, then. Yes, but he puts us to work also and our part is essential, as he has shown in verse 12|, though secondary to that of God. {For his good-pleasure} (\huper ts eudokias\). Songs:Whitney puts "the will of God" behind gravitation and all the laws of nature.
rwp@Revelation:14:16 @{Cast} (\ebalen\). Second aorist active indicative of \ball\. No violence by the use of \ebalen\ as is seen in strkjv@Matthew:10:34| (\balein eirnn\, to bring peace). {Was reaped} (\etheristh\). First aorist passive indicative of \theriz\. Both prophetic aorists again. Christ puts in the sickle as he wills with his own agents (Matthew:9:37f.; strkjv@13:39,41|).
rwp@Romans:2:29 @{Who is one inwardly} (\ho en ti krupti\). Repeat \Ioudaios\ (Jew) here also, "the in the inward part Jew" (circumcision of the heart \peritom kardias\ and not a mere surgical operation as in strkjv@Colossians:2:11|, in the spirit \en pneumati\, with which compare strkjv@2Corinthians:3:3,6|). This inward or inside Jew who lives up to his covenant relation with God is the high standard that Paul puts before the merely professional Jew described above. {Whose praise} (\hou ho epainos\). The antecedent of the relative \hou\ is \Ioudaios\ (Jew). Probably (Gifford) a reference to the etymology of Judah (praise) as seen in strkjv@Galatians:49:8|.
rwp@Romans:14:6 @{Regardeth} (\phronei\). "Thinks of," "esteems," "observes," "puts his mind on" (from \phrn\, mind). The Textus Receptus has also "he that regardeth not," but it is not genuine. {Unto the Lord} (\kurii\). Dative case. Songs:as to \ti thei\ (unto God). He eats unto the Lord, he eats not unto the Lord. Paul's principle of freedom in non-essentials is most important. The Jewish Christians still observed the Seventh day (the Sabbath). The Gentile Christians were observing the first day of the week in honour of Christ's Resurrection on that day. Paul pleads for liberty.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}