NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp aim:
rwp@Info_1Corinthians
@ Some good commentaries on I Corinthians are the following: On the Greek Bachmann in the _Zahn Kommentar_, Edwards, Ellicott, Findlay (Expositor's Greek Testament), Godet, Goudge, Lietzmann (_Handbuch zum N.T._), Lightfoot (chs. 1-7), Parry, Robertson and Plummer (_Int. Crit._), Stanley, J. Weiss (_Meyer Kommentar_); on the English Dods (_Exp. Bible_), McFadyen, Parry, Ramsay, Rendall, F. W. Robertson, Walker (_Reader's Comm._). strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1 @{Called to be an apostle} (\kltos apostolos\). Verbal adjective \kltos\ from \kale\, without \einai\, to be. Literally, {a called apostle} (Romans:1:1|), not so-called, but one whose apostleship is due not to himself or to men (Galatians:1:1|), but to God, {through the will of God} (\dia thelmatos tou theou\). The intermediate (\dia, duo\, two) agent between Paul's not being Christ's apostle and becoming one was God's will (\thelma\, something willed of God), God's command (1Timothy:1:1|). Paul knows that he is not one of the twelve apostles, but he is on a par with them because, like them, he is chosen by God. He is an apostle of Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus (MSS. vary here, later epistles usually Christ Jesus). The refusal of the Judaizers to recognize Paul as equal to the twelve made him the more careful to claim his position. Bengel sees here Paul's denial of mere human authority in his position and also of personal merit: _Namque mentione Dei excluditur auctoramentum humanum, mentione Voluntatis Dei, meritum Pauli_. {Our brother} (\ho adelphos\). Literally, the brother, but regular Greek idiom for our brother. This Sosthenes, now with Paul in Ephesus, is probably the same Sosthenes who received the beating meant for Paul in Corinth (Acts:18:17|). If so, the beating did him good for he is now a follower of Christ. He is in no sense a co-author of the Epistle, but merely associated with Paul because they knew him in Corinth. He may have been compelled by the Jews to leave Corinth when he, a ruler of the synagogue, became a Christian. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1| for the mention of Silas and Timothy in the salutation. Sosthenes could have been Paul's amanuensis for this letter, but there is no proof of it.
rwp@1Corinthians:1:13 @{Is Christ divided?} (\memeristai ho Christos;\). Perfect passive indicative, Does Christ stand divided? It is not certain, though probable, that this is interrogative like the following clauses. Hofmann calls the assertory form a "rhetorical impossibility." The absence of \m\ here merely allows an affirmative answer which is true. The fourth or Christ party claimed to possess Christ in a sense not true of the others. Perhaps the leaders of this Christ party with their arrogant assumptions of superiority are the false apostles, ministers of Satan posing as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:12-15|). {Was Paul crucified for you?} (\M Paulos estaurth huper humn;\). An indignant "No" is demanded by \m\. Paul shows his tact by employing himself as the illustration, rather than Apollos or Cephas. Probably \huper\, over, in behalf of, rather than \peri\ (concerning, around) is genuine, though either makes good sense here. In the _Koin_ \huper\ encroaches on \peri\ as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1|. {Were ye baptized into the name of Paul?} (\eis to onoma Paulou ebaptisthte;\). It is unnecessary to say {into} for \eis\ rather than {in} since \eis\ is the same preposition originally as \en\ and both are used with \baptiz\ as in strkjv@Acts:8:16; strkjv@10:48| with no difference in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). Paul evidently knows the idea in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| and scouts the notion of being put on a par with Christ or the Trinity. He is no rival of Christ. This use of \onoma\ for the person is not only in the LXX, but the papyri, ostraca, and inscriptions give numerous examples of the name of the king or the god for the power and authority of the king or god (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 146ff., 196ff.; _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 121).
rwp@1Corinthians:1:15 @{Lest any man should say} (\hina m tis eipi\). Certainly sub-final \hina\ again or contemplated result as in strkjv@7:29; strkjv@John:9:2|. Ellicott thinks that already some in Corinth were laying emphasis on the person of the baptizer whether Peter or some one else. It is to be recalled that Jesus himself baptized no one (John:4:2|) to avoid this very kind of controversy. And yet there are those today who claim Paul as a sacramentalist, an impossible claim in the light of his words here.
rwp@1Corinthians:1:21 @{Seeing that} (\epeid\). Since (\epei\ and \d\) with explanatory \gar\. {Through its wisdom} (\dia ts sophias\). Article here as possessive. The two wisdoms contrasted. {Knew not God} (\ouk egn\). Failed to know, second aorist (effective) active indicative of \ginsk\, solemn dirge of doom on both Greek philosophy and Jewish theology that failed to know God. Has modern philosophy done better? There is today even a godless theology (Humanism). "Now that God's wisdom has reduced the self-wise world to ignorance" (Findlay). {Through the foolishness of the preaching} (\dia ts mrias tou krugmatos\). Perhaps "proclamation" is the idea, for it is not \kruxis\, the act of heralding, but \krugma\, the message heralded or the proclamation as in verse 23|. The metaphor is that of the herald proclaiming the approach of the king (Matthew:3:1; strkjv@4:17|). See also \krugma\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:4; strkjv@2Timothy:4:17|. The proclamation of the Cross seemed foolishness to the wiseacres then (and now), but it is consummate wisdom, God's wisdom and good-pleasure (\eudoksan\). The foolishness of preaching is not the preaching of foolishness. {To save them that believe} (\ssai tous pisteuontas\). This is the heart of God's plan of redemption, the proclamation of salvation for all those who trust Jesus Christ on the basis of his death for sin on the Cross. The mystery-religions all offered salvation by initiation and ritual as the Pharisees did by ceremonialism. Christianity reaches the heart directly by trust in Christ as the Saviour. It is God's wisdom.
rwp@1Corinthians:1:22 @{Seeing that} (\epeid\). Resumes from verse 21|. The structure is not clear, but probably verses 23,24| form a sort of conclusion or apodosis to verse 22| the protasis. The resumptive, almost inferential, use of \de\ like \alla\ in the apodosis is not unusual. {Ask for signs} (\smeia aitousin\). The Jews often came to Jesus asking for signs (Matthew:12:38; strkjv@16:1; strkjv@John:6:30|). {Seek after wisdom} (\sophian ztousin\). "The Jews claimed to _possess_ the truth: the Greeks were seekers, _speculators_" (Vincent) as in strkjv@Acts:17:23|.
rwp@1Corinthians:1:23 @{But we preach Christ crucified} (\hmeis de krussomen Christon estaurmenon\). Grammatically stated as a partial result (\de\) of the folly of both Jews and Greeks, actually in sharp contrast. We proclaim, "we do not discuss or dispute" (Lightfoot). Christ (Messiah) as crucified, as in strkjv@2:2; strkjv@Galatians:3:1|, "not a sign-shower nor a philosopher" (Vincent). Perfect passive participle of \stauro\. {Stumbling-block} (\skandalon\). Papyri examples mean trap or snare which here tripped the Jews who wanted a conquering Messiah with a world empire, not a condemned and crucified one (Matthew:27:42; strkjv@Luke:24:21|). {Foolishness} (\mrian\). Folly as shown by their conduct in Athens (Acts:17:32|).
rwp@1Corinthians:1:26 @{Behold} (\blepete\). Same form for imperative present active plural and indicative. Either makes sense as in strkjv@John:5:39| \eraunate\ and strkjv@14:1| \pisteuete\. {Calling} (\klsin\). The act of calling by God, based not on the external condition of those called (\kltoi\, verse 2|), but on God's sovereign love. It is a clinching illustration of Paul's argument, an _argumentum ad hominen_. {How that} (\hoti\). Explanatory apposition to \klsin\. {After the flesh} (\kata sarka\). According to the standards of the flesh and to be used not only with \sophoi\ (wise, philosophers), but also \dunatoi\ (men of dignity and power), \eugeneis\ (noble, high birth), the three claims to aristocracy (culture, power, birth). {Are called}. Not in the Greek, but probably to be supplied from the idea in \klsin\.
rwp@1Corinthians:2:4 @{Not in persuasive words of wisdom} (\ouk en pithois sophias logois\). This looks like a false disclaimer or mock modesty, for surely the preacher desires to be persuasive. This adjective \pithos\ (MSS. \peithos\) has not yet been found elsewhere. It seems to be formed directly from \peith\, to persuade, as \pheidos\ (\phidos\) is from \pheidomai\, to spare. The old Greek form \pithanos\ is common enough and is used by Josephus (_Ant_. VIII. 9. 1) of "the plausible words of the lying prophet" in strkjv@1Kings:13|. The kindred word \pithanologia\ occurs in strkjv@Colossians:2:4| for the specious and plausible Gnostic philosophers. And gullible people are easy marks for these plausible pulpiteers. Corinth put a premium on the veneer of false rhetoric and thin thinking. {But in demonstration} (\all' en apodeixei\). In contrast with the {plausibility} just mentioned. This word, though an old one from \apodeiknumi\, to show forth, occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. {Spirit} (\pneuma\) here can be the Holy Spirit or inward spirit as opposed to superficial expression and {power} (\dunamis\) is moral power rather than intellectual acuteness (cf. strkjv@1:18|).
rwp@1Corinthians:2:10 @{But unto us God revealed them} (\hmin gar apekalupsen ho theos\). Songs:with \gar\ B 37 Sah Cop read instead of \de\ of Aleph A C D. "\De\ is superficially easier; \gar\ intrinsically better" (Findlay). Paul explains why this is no longer hidden, "for God revealed unto us" the wonders of grace pictured in verse 9|. We do not have to wait for heaven to see them. Hence we can utter those things hidden from the eye, the ear, the heart of man. This revelation (\apekalupsen\, first aorist active indicative) took place, at "the entry of the Gospel into the world," not "when we were admitted into the Church, when we were baptized" as Lightfoot interprets it. {Through the Spirit} (\dia tou pneumatos\). The Holy Spirit is the agent of this definite revelation of grace, a revelation with a definite beginning or advent (constative aorist), an unveiling by the Spirit where "human ability and research would not have sufficed" (Robertson and Plummer), "according to the revelation of the mystery" (Romans:16:25|), "the revelation given to Christians as an event that began a new epoch in the world's history" (Edwards). {Searcheth all things} (\panta erauni\). This is the usual form from A.D. 1 on rather than the old \ereuna\. The word occurs (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) for a professional searcher's report and \erauntai\, searchers for customs officials. "The Spirit is the organ of understanding between man and God" (Findlay). Songs:in strkjv@Romans:8:27| we have this very verb \erauna\ again of God's searching our hearts. The Holy Spirit not merely investigates us, but he searches "even the deep things of God" (\kai ta bath tou theou\). _Profunda Dei_ (Vulgate). Cf. "the deep things of Satan" (Revelation:2:24|) and Paul's language in strkjv@Romans:11:33| "Oh the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God." Paul's point is simply that the Holy Spirit fully comprehends the depth of God's nature and his plans of grace and so is fully competent to make the revelation here claimed.
rwp@1Corinthians:2:11 @{Knoweth} (\oiden, egnken\). Second perfect of root \id-\, to see and so know, first perfect of \ginsk\, to know by personal experience, has come to know and still knows. See First John for a clear distinction in the use of \oida\ and \ginsk\. {The spirit of man that is in him} (\to pneuma tou anthrpou to en auti\). The self-consciousness of man that resides in the man or woman (generic term for mankind, \anthrpos\). {The Spirit of God} (\to pneuma tou theou\). Note the absence of \to en auti\. It is not the mere self-consciousness of God, but the personal Holy Spirit in his relation to God the Father. Paul's analogy between the spirit of man and the Spirit of God does not hold clear through and he guards it at this vital point as he does elsewhere as in strkjv@Romans:8:26| and in the full Trinitarian benediction in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:13|. \Pneuma\ in itself merely means breath or wind as in strkjv@John:3:8|. To know accurately Paul's use of the word in every instance calls for an adequate knowledge of his theology, and psychology. But the point here is plain. God's Holy Spirit is amply qualified to make the revelation claimed here in verses 6-10|.
rwp@1Corinthians:2:12 @{But we} (\hmeis de\). We Christians like {us} (\hmin\) in verse 10| of the revelation, but particularly Paul and the other apostles. {Received} (\elabomen\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban\ and so a definite event, though the constative aorist may include various stages. {Not the spirit of the world} (\ou to pneuma tou kosmou\). Probably a reference to the wisdom of this age in verse 6|. See also strkjv@Romans:8:4,6,7; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:4| (\the pneuma heteron\). {But the spirit which is of God} (\alla to pneuma to ek theou\). Rather, "from God" (\ek\), which proceeds from God. {That we might know} (\hina eidmen\). Second perfect subjunctive with \hina\ to express purpose. Here is a distinct claim of the Holy Spirit for understanding (Illumination) the Revelation received. It is not a senseless rhapsody or secret mystery, but God expects us to understand "the things that are freely given us by God" (\ta hupo tou theou charisthenta hmin\). First aorist passive neuter plural articular participle of \charizomai\, to bestow. God gave the revelation through the Holy Spirit and he gives us the illumination of the Holy Spirit to understand the mind of the Spirit. The tragic failures of men to understand clearly God's revealed will is but a commentary on the weakness and limitation of the human intellect even when enlightened by the Holy Spirit.
rwp@1Corinthians:2:13 @{Which things also we speak} (\ha kai laloumen\). This onomatopoetic verb \lale\ (from \la-la\), to utter sounds. In the papyri the word calls more attention to the form of utterance while \leg\ refers more to the substance. But \lale\ in the N.T. as here is used of the highest and holiest speech. Undoubtedly Paul employs the word purposely for the utterance of the revelation which he has understood. That is to say, there is revelation (verse 10|), illumination (verse 12|), and inspiration (verse 13|). Paul claims therefore the help of the Holy Spirit for the reception of the revelation, for the understanding of it, for the expression of it. Paul claimed this authority for his preaching (1Thessalonians:4:2|) and for his epistles (2Thessalonians:3:14|). {Not in words which man's wisdom teacheth} (\ouk en didaktois anthrpins sophias logois\). Literally, "not in words taught by human wisdom." The verbal adjective \didaktois\ (from \didask\, to teach) is here passive in idea and is followed by the ablative case of origin or source as in strkjv@John:6:45|, \esontai pantes didaktoi theou\ (from strkjv@Isaiah:54:13|), "They shall all be taught by God." The ablative in Greek, as is well known, has the same form as the genitive, though quite different in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516). Songs:then Paul claims the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance (\laloumen\) of the words, "which the Spirit teacheth (\en didaktois pneumatos\), "in words taught by the Spirit" (ablative \pneumatos\ as above). Clearly Paul means that the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance of the revelation extends to the words. No theory of inspiration is here stated, but it is not _mere_ human wisdom. Paul's own Epistles bear eloquent witness to the lofty claim here made. They remain today after nearly nineteen centuries throbbing with the power of the Spirit of God, dynamic with life for the problems of today as when Paul wrote them for the needs of the believers in his time, the greatest epistles of all time, surcharged with the energy of God. {Comparing spiritual things with spiritual} (\pneumatikois pneumatika sunkrinontes\). Each of these words is in dispute. The verb \sunkrin\, originally meant to combine, to join together fitly. In the LXX it means to interpret dreams (Genesis:40:8,22; strkjv@41:12|) possibly by comparison. In the later Greek it may mean to compare as in strkjv@2Corinthians:10:12|. In the papyri Moulton and Milligan (_Vocabulary_) give it only for "decide," probably after comparing. But "comparing," in spite of the translations, does not suit well here. Songs:it is best to follow the original meaning to combine as do Lightfoot and Ellicott. But what gender is \pneumatikois\? Is it masculine or neuter like \pneumatika\? If masculine, the idea would be "interpreting (like LXX) spiritual truths to spiritual persons" or "matching spiritual truths with spiritual persons." This is a possible rendering and makes good sense in harmony with verse 14|. If \pneumatikois\ be taken as neuter plural (associative instrumental case after \sun\ in \sunkrinontes\), the idea most naturally would be, "combining spiritual ideas (\pneumatika\) with spiritual words" (\pneumatikois\). This again makes good sense in harmony with the first part of verse 13|. On the whole this is the most natural way to take it, though various other possibilities exist.
rwp@1Corinthians:3:10 @{As a wise masterbuilder} (\hs sophos architektn\). Paul does not shirk his share in the work at Corinth with all the sad outcome there. He absolves Apollos from responsibility for the divisions. He denies that he himself is to blame. In doing so he has to praise himself because the Judaizers who fomented the trouble at Corinth had directly blamed Paul. It is not always wise for a preacher to defend himself against attack, but it is sometimes necessary. Factions in the church were now a fact and Paul went to the bottom of the matter. God gave Paul the grace to do what he did. This is the only New Testament example of the old and common word \architektn\, our architect. \Tektn\ is from \tikt\, to beget, and means a begetter, then a worker in wood or stone, a carpenter or mason (Matthew:13:55; strkjv@Mark:6:3|). \Archi-\ is an old inseparable prefix like \archaggelos\ (archangel), \archepiscopos\ (archbishop), \archiereus\ (chiefpriest). \Architektn\ occurs in the papyri and inscriptions in an even wider sense than our use of architect, sometimes of the chief engineers. But Paul means to claim primacy as pastor of the church in Corinth as is true of every pastor who is the architect of the whole church life and work. All the workmen (\tektones\, carpenters) work under the direction of the architect (Plato, _Statesman_, 259). "As a wise architect I laid a foundation" (\themelion ethka\). Much depends on the wisdom of the architect in laying the foundation. This is the technical phrase (Luke:6:48; strkjv@14:29|), a cognate accusative for \themelion\. The substantive \themelion\ is from the same root \the\ as \ethka\ (\ti-thmi\). We cannot neatly reproduce the idiom in English. "I placed a placing" does only moderately well. Paul refers directly to the events described by Luke in strkjv@Acts:18:1-18|. The aorist \ethka\ is the correct text, not the perfect \tetheika\. {Another buildeth thereon} (\allos epoikodomei\). Note the preposition \epi\ with the verb each time (10,11,12,14|). The successor to Paul did not have to lay a new foundation, but only to go on building on that already laid. It is a pity when the new pastor has to dig up the foundation and start all over again as if an earthquake had come. {Take heed how he buildeth thereon} (\blepet ps epoikodomei\). The carpenters have need of caution how they carry out the plans of the original architect. Successive architects of great cathedrals carry on through centuries the original design. The result becomes the wonder of succeeding generations. There is no room for individual caprice in the superstructure.
rwp@1Corinthians:3:11 @{Other foundation} (\themelion allon\). The gender of the adjective is here masculine as is shown by \allon\. If neuter, it would be \allo\. It is masculine because Paul has Christ in mind. It is not here \heteron\ a different kind of gospel (\heteron euaggelion\, strkjv@Galatians:1:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:4|) which is not another (\allo\, strkjv@Galatians:1:7|) in reality. But another Jesus (2Corinthians:11:4|, \allon Isoun\) is a reflection on the one Lord Jesus. Hence there is no room on the platform with Jesus for another Saviour, whether Buddha, Mahomet, Dowie, Eddy, or what not. Jesus Christ is the one foundation and it is gratuitous impudence for another to assume the role of Foundation. {Than that which is laid, which is Christ Jesus} (\para ton keimenon, hos estin Isous Christos\). Literally, "alongside (\para\) the one laid (\keimenon\)," already laid (present middle participle of \keimai\, used here as often as the perfect passive of \tithmi\ in place of \tetheimenon\). Paul scouts the suggestion that one even in the interest of so-called "new thought" will dare to lay beside Jesus another foundation for religion. And yet I have seen an article by a professor in a theological seminary in which he advocates regarding Jesus as a landmark, not as a goal, not as a foundation. Clearly Paul means that on this one true foundation, Jesus Christ, one must build only what is in full harmony with the Foundation which is Jesus Christ. If one accuses Paul of narrowness, it can be replied that the architect has to be narrow in the sense of building here and not there. A broad foundation will be too thin and unstable for a solid and abiding structure. It can be said also that Paul is here merely repeating the claim of Jesus himself on this very subject when he quoted strkjv@Psalms:118:22f.| to the members of the Sanhedrin who challenged his authority (Mark:11:10f.; strkjv@Matthew:21:42-45; strkjv@Luke:20:17f.|). Apostles and prophets go into this temple of God, but Christ Jesus is the chief corner stone (\akrognaios\, strkjv@Ephesians:2:20|). All believers are living stones in this temple (1Peter:2:5|). But there is only one foundation possible.
rwp@1Corinthians:3:18 @{Let no man deceive himself} (\Mdeis heauton exapat\). A warning that implied that some of them were guilty of doing it (\m\ and the present imperative). Excited partisans can easily excite themselves to a pious phrenzy, hypnotize themselves with their own supposed devotion to truth. {Thinketh that he is wise} (\dokei sophos einai\). Condition of first class and assumed to be true. Predicate nominative \sophos\ with the infinitive to agree with subject of \dokei\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1038). Paul claimed to be "wise" himself in verse 10| and he desires that the claimant to wisdom may become wise (\hina gentai sophos\, purpose clause with \hina\ and subjunctive) by becoming a fool (\mros genesth\, second aorist middle imperative of \ginomai\) as this age looks at him. This false wisdom of the world (1:18-20,23; strkjv@2:14|), this self-conceit, has led to strife and wrangling. Cut it out.
rwp@1Corinthians:4:1 @{Ministers of Christ} (\hupretas Christou\). Paul and all ministers (\diakonous\) of the New Covenant (1Corinthians:3:5|) are under-rowers, subordinate rowers of Christ, only here in Paul's Epistles, though in the Gospels (Luke:4:20| the attendant in the synagogue) and the Acts (Acts:13:5|) of John Mark. The {so} (\houts\) gathers up the preceding argument (3:5-23|) and applies it directly by the {as} (\hs\) that follows. {Stewards of the mysteries of God} (\oikonomous mustrin theou\). The steward or house manager (\oikos\, house, \nem\, to manage, old word) was a slave (\doulos\) under his lord (\kurios\, strkjv@Luke:12:42|), but a master (Luke:16:1|) over the other slaves in the house (menservants \paidas\, maidservants \paidiskas\ strkjv@Luke:12:45|), an overseer (\epitropos\) over the rest (Matthew:20:8|). Hence the under-rower (\huprets\) of Christ has a position of great dignity as steward (\oikonomos\) of the mysteries of God. Jesus had expressly explained that the mysteries of the kingdom were open to the disciples (Matthew:13:11|). They were entrusted with the knowledge of some of God's secrets though the disciples were not such apt pupils as they claimed to be (Matthew:13:51; strkjv@16:8-12|). As stewards Paul and other ministers are entrusted with the mysteries (see on ¯1Corinthians:2:7| for this word) of God and are expected to teach them. "The church is the \oikos\ (1Timothy:3:15|), God the \oikodespots\ (Matthew:13:52|), the members the \oikeioi\ (Galatians:6:10; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19|)" (Lightfoot). Paul had a vivid sense of the dignity of this stewardship (\oikonomia\) of God given to him (Colossians:1:25; strkjv@Ephesians:1:10|). The ministry is more than a mere profession or trade. It is a calling from God for stewardship.
rwp@1Corinthians:7:12 @{But to the rest say I, not the Lord} (\tois de loipois leg eg, ouch ho Kurios\). Paul has no word about marriage from Jesus beyond the problem of divorce. This is no disclaimer of inspiration. He simply means that here he is not quoting a command of Jesus. {An unbelieving wife} (\gunaika apiston\). This is a new problem, the result of work among the Gentiles, that did not arise in the time of Jesus. The form \apiston\ is the same as the masculine because a compound adjective. Paul has to deal with mixed marriages as missionaries do today in heathen lands. The rest (\hoi loipoi\) for Gentiles (Ephesians:2:3|) we have already had in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13; strkjv@5:6| which see. The Christian husband married his wife when he himself was an unbeliever. The word \apistos\ sometimes means unfaithful (Luke:12:46|), but not here (cf. strkjv@John:20:27|). {She is content} (\suneudokei\). Late compound verb to be pleased together with, agree together. In the papyri. {Let him not leave her} (\m aphiet autn\). Perhaps here and in verses 11,13| \aphimi\ should be translated "put away" like \apolu\ in strkjv@Mark:10:1|. Some understand \aphimi\ as separation from bed and board, not divorce.
rwp@1Corinthians:7:25 @{I have no commandment of the Lord} (\epitagn Kuriou ouk ech\). A late word from \epitass\, old Greek verb to enjoin, to give orders to. Paul did have (verse 10|) a command from the Lord as we have in Matthew and Mark. It was quite possible for Paul to know this command of Jesus as he did other sayings of Jesus (Acts:20:35|) even if he had as yet no access to a written gospel or had received no direct revelation on the subject from Jesus (1Corinthians:11:23|). Sayings of Jesus were passed on among the believers. But Paul had no specific word from Jesus on the subject of virgins. They call for special treatment, young unmarried women only Paul means (7:25,28,34,36-38|) and not as in strkjv@Revelation:14:4| (metaphor). It is probable that in the letter (7:1|) the Corinthians had asked about this problem. {But I give my judgment} (\gnmn de didmi\). About mixed marriages (12-16|) Paul had the command of Jesus concerning divorce to guide him. Here he has nothing from Jesus at all. Songs:he gives no "command," but only "a judgment," a deliberately formed decision from knowledge (2Corinthians:8:10|), not a mere passing fancy. {As one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful} (\hs lemenos hupo kuriou pistos einai\). Perfect passive participle of \elee\, old verb to receive mercy (\eleos\). \Pistos\ is predicate nominative with infinitive \einai\. This language, so far from being a disclaimer of inspiration, is an express claim to help from the Lord in the forming of this duly considered judgment, which is in no sense a command, but an inspired opinion.
rwp@1Corinthians:9:27 @{But I buffet my body} (\alla huppiaz mou to sma\). In Aristophanes, Aristotle, Plutarch, from \huppion\, and that from \hupo\ and \ops\ (in papyri), the part of the face under the eyes, a blow in the face, to beat black and blue. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:18:5| which see. Paul does not, like the Gnostics, consider his \sarx\ or his \sma\ sinful and evil. But "it is like the horses in a chariot race, which must be kept well in hand by whip and rein if the prize is to be secured" (Robertson and Plummer). The boxers often used boxing gloves (\cestus\, of ox-hide bands) which gave telling blows. Paul was not willing for his body to be his master. He found good as the outcome of this self-discipline (2Corinthians:12:7; strkjv@Romans:8:13; strkjv@Colossians:2:23; strkjv@3:5|). {And bring it into bondage} (\kai doulagg\). Late compound verb from \doulaggos\, in Diodorus Siculus, Epictetus and substantive in papyri. It is the metaphor of the victor leading the vanquished as captive and slave. {Lest by any means} (\m ps\). Common conjunction for negative purpose with subjunctive as here (\genmai\, second aorist middle). {After that I have preached to others} (\allois krxas\). First aorist active participle of \kruss\ (see on ¯1:23|), common verb to preach, from word \krux\ (herald) and that is probably the idea here. A \krux\ at the games announced the rules of the game and called out the competitors. Songs:Paul is not merely a herald, but a competitor also. {I myself should be rejected} (\autos adokimos genmai\). Literally, "I myself should become rejected." \Adokimos\ is an old adjective used of metals, coin, soil (Hebrews:6:8|) and in a moral sense only by Paul in N.T. (1Corinthians:9:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:5-7; strkjv@Romans:1:28; strkjv@Titus:1:16; strkjv@2Timothy:3:8|). It means not standing the test (\dokimos\ from \dokimaz\). Paul means rejected for the {prize}, not for the entrance to the race. He will fail to win if he breaks the rules of the game (Matthew:7:22f.|). What is the prize before Paul? Is it that {reward} (\misthos\) of which he spoke in verse 18|, his glorying of preaching a free gospel? Songs:Edwards argues. Most writers take Paul to refer to the possibility of his rejection in his personal salvation at the end of the race. He does not claim absolute perfection (Phillipians:3:12|) and so he presses on. At the end he has serene confidence (2Timothy:4:7|) with the race run and won. It is a humbling thought for us all to see this wholesome fear instead of smug complacency in this greatest of all heralds of Christ.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:16 @{The cup of blessing} (\to potrion ts eulogias\). The cup over which we pronounce a blessing as by Christ at the institution of the ordinance. {A communion of the blood of Christ} (\koinnia tou haimatos tou Christou\). Literally, a participation in (objective genitive) the blood of Christ. The word \koinnia\ is an old one from \koinnos\, partner, and so here and strkjv@Phillipians:2:1; strkjv@3:10|. It can mean also fellowship (Galatians:2:9|) or contribution (2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@Phillipians:1:5|). It is, of course, a spiritual participation in the blood of Christ which is symbolized by the cup. Same meaning for \koinnia\ in reference to "the body of Christ." {The bread which we break} (\ton arton hon klmen\). The loaf. Inverse attraction of the antecedent (\arton\) to the case (accusative) of the relative (\hon\) according to classic idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 488). \Artos\ probably from \ar\, to join or fit (flour mixed with water and baked). The mention of the cup here before the bread does not mean that this order was observed for see the regular order of bread and then cup in strkjv@11:24-27|.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:20 @{But I say that} (\all' hoti\). The verb \phmi\ (I say) must be repeated from verse 19| before \hoti\. {To demons, and not to God} (\daimoniois kai ou thei\). Referring to LXX text of strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:17|. It is probable that by \ou thei\ Paul means "to a no-god" as also in strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:21| \ep' ouk ethnei\ (by a no-people). This is Paul's reply to the heathen who claimed that they worshipped the gods represented by the images and not the mere wood or stone or metal idols. The word \daimonia\ is an adjective \daimonios\ from \daimn\, an inferior deity, and with same idea originally, once in this sense in N.T. (Acts:17:18|). Elsewhere in N.T. it has the notion of evil spirits as here, those spiritual forces of wickedness (Ephesians:6:12|) that are under the control of Satan. The word \daimonia\, so common in the Gospels, occurs in Paul's writings only here and strkjv@1Timothy:4:1|. Demonology is a deep and dark subject here pictured by Paul as the explanation of heathenism which is a departure from God (Romans:1:19-23|) and a substitute for the worship of God. It is a terrible indictment which is justified by the licentious worship associated with paganism then and now.
rwp@1Corinthians:11:6 @{Let her also be shorn} (\kai keirasth\). Aorist middle imperative of \keir\, to shear (as sheep). Let her cut her hair close. A single act by the woman. {If it is a shame} (\ei de aischron\). Condition of first class assumed to be true. \Aischron\ is old adjective from \aischos\, bareness, disgrace. Clearly Paul uses such strong language because of the effect on a woman's reputation in Corinth by such conduct that proclaimed her a lewd woman. Social custom varied in the world then as now, but there was no alternative in Corinth. {To be shorn or shaven} (\to keirasthai kai xurasthai\). Articular infinitives subject of copula \estin\ understood, \keirasthai\ first aorist middle, \xurasthai\ present middle. Note change in tense. {Let her be veiled} (\katakaluptesth\). Present middle imperative of old compound \kata-kalupt\, here alone in N.T. Let her cover up herself with the veil (down, \kata\, the Greek says, the veil hanging down from the head).
rwp@1Corinthians:11:23 @{For I received of the Lord} (\ego gar parelabon apo tou Kuriou\). Direct claim to revelation from the Lord Jesus on the origin of the Lord's Supper. Luke's account (Luke:22:17-20|) is almost identical with this one. He could easily have read I Corinthians before he wrote his Gospel. See strkjv@15:3| for use of both \parelabon\ and \paredka\. Note \para\ in both verbs. Paul received the account from (\para--apo\) the Lord and passed it on from himself to them, a true \paradosis\ (tradition) as in strkjv@11:2|. {He was betrayed} (\paredideto\). Imperfect passive indicative (irregular form for \paredidoto\, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 340). Same verb as \paredka\ (first aorist active indicative just used for "I delivered").
rwp@1Corinthians:11:25 @{After supper} (\meta to deipnsai\). \Meta\ and the articular aorist active infinitive, "after the dining" (or the supping) as in strkjv@Luke:22:20|. {The new covenant} (\h kain diathk\). For \diathk\ see on ¯Matthew:26:28|. For \kainos\ see on ¯Luke:5:38; strkjv@22:20|. The position of \estin\ before \en ti haimati\ (in my blood) makes it a secondary or additional predicate and not to be taken just with \diathk\ (covenant or will). {As oft as ye drink it} (\hosakis an pinte\). Usual construction for general temporal clause of repetition (\an\ and the present subjunctive with \hosakis\). Songs:in verse 26|.
rwp@1Corinthians:12:28 @{God hath set some} (\hous men etheto ho theos\). See verse 18| for \etheto ho theos\. Note middle voice (for his own use). Paul begins as if he means to say \hous men apostolous, hous de prophtas\ (some apostles, some prophets), but he changes the construction and has no \hous de\, but instead \prton, deuteron, epeita\ (first, second, then, etc.). {In the church} (\en ti ekklsii\). The general sense of \ekklsia\ as in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| and later in strkjv@Colossians:1:18,24; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23,32; strkjv@Hebrews:12:23|. See list also in strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|. See on ¯Matthew:10:2| for \apostolous\, the official title given the twelve by Jesus, and claimed by Paul though not one of the twelve. {Prophets} (\prophtas\). For-speakers for God and Christ. See the list of prophets and teachers in strkjv@Acts:13:1| with Barnabas first and Saul last. Prophets are needed today if men will let God's Spirit use them, men moved to utter the deep things of God. {Teachers} (\didaskalous\). Old word from \didask\, to teach. Used to the Baptist (Luke:3:12|), to Jesus (John:3:10; strkjv@13:13|), and of Paul by himself along with \apostolos\ (1Timothy:2:7|). It is a calamity when the preacher is no longer a teacher, but only an exhorter. See strkjv@Ephesians:4:11|. {Then miracles} (\epeita dunameis\). Here a change is made from the concrete to the abstract. See the reverse in strkjv@Romans:12:7|. See these words (\dunameis, iamtn, glssn\) in verses 9,10| with \glssn\, last again. But these two new terms (helps, governments). {Helps} (\antilmpseis\). Old word, from \antilambanomai\, to lay hold of. In LXX, common in papyri, here only in N.T. Probably refers to the work of the deacons, help rendered to the poor and the sick. {Governments} (\kubernseis\). Old word from \kuberna\ (cf. \Kubernts\ in strkjv@Acts:27:11|) like Latin _gubernare_, our govern. Songs:a governing. Probably Paul has in mind bishops (\episcopoi\) or elders (\presbuteroi\), the outstanding leaders (\hoi proistamenoi\ in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12; strkjv@Romans:12:8|; \hoi hgoumenoi\ in strkjv@Acts:15:22; strkjv@Hebrews:13:7,17,24|). Curiously enough, these two offices (pastors and deacons) which are not named specifically are the two that survive today. See strkjv@Phillipians:1:1| for both officers.
rwp@1Corinthians:14:1 @{Follow after love} (\dikete tn agapn\). As if a veritable chase. Paul comes back to the idea in strkjv@12:31| (same use of \zloute\) and proves the superiority of prophecy to the other spiritual gifts not counting faith, hope, love of strkjv@13:13|. {But rather that ye may prophesy} (\mallon de hina prophteute\). Distinct aim in view as in verse 5|. Old verb from \prophts\, common in N.T. Present subjunctive, "that ye may keep on prophesying."
rwp@1Corinthians:14:18 @{More than you all} (\pantn humn mallon\). Ablative case after \mallon\. Astonishing claim by Paul that doubtless had a fine effect.
rwp@1Corinthians:14:37 @{The commandment of the Lord} (\Kuriou entol\). The prophet or the one with the gift of tongues or the disturbing woman would be quick to resent the sharp words of Paul. He claims inspiration for his position.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:3 @{First of all} (\en prtois\). Among first things. _In primis_. Not to time, but to importance. {Which I also received} (\ho kai parelabon\). Direct revelation claimed as about the institution of the Lord's Supper (11:23|) and same verbs used (\paredka, parelabon\). Four items given by Paul in explaining "the gospel" which Paul preached. Stanley calls it (verses 1-11|) the creed of the early disciples, but "rather a sample of the exact form of the apostle's early teaching, than a profession of faith on the part of converts" (Vincent). The four items are presented by four verbs (died, \apethanen\, was buried, \etaph\, hath been raised, \eggertai\, appeared, \phth\). {Christ died} (\Christos apethanen\). Historical fact and crucial event. {For our sins} (\huper tn hamartin hmn\). \Huper\ means literally over, in behalf, even instead of (Galatians:3:13|), where used of persons. But here much in the sense of \peri\ (Galatians:1:14|) as is common in _Koin_. In strkjv@1Peter:3:18| we have \peri hamartin, huper adikn\. {According to the Scriptures} (\kata tas graphas\). As Jesus showed (Luke:22:37; strkjv@24:25|) and as Peter pointed out (Acts:2:25-27; strkjv@3:35|) and as Paul had done (Acts:13:24f.; strkjv@17:3|). Cf. strkjv@Romans:1:2ff|.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:32 @{After the manner of men} (\kata anthrpon\). Like men, for applause, money, etc. (4:9ff.; strkjv@Phillipians:3:7|). {If I fought with wild beasts at Ephesus} (\ei ethriomachsa en Ephesi\). Late verb from \thriomachos\, a fighter with wild beasts. Found in inscriptions and in Ignatius. Those who argue for an Ephesian imprisonment for Paul and Ephesus as the place where he wrote the imprisonment epistles (see Duncan's book just mentioned) take the verb literally. There is in the ruins of Ephesus now a place called St. Paul's Prison. But Paul was a Roman citizen and it was unlawful to make such a one be a \thriomachos\. If he were cast to the lions unlawfully, he could have prevented it by claiming his citizenship. Besides, shortly after this Paul wrote II Corinthians, but he does not mention so unusual a peril in the list in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:23f|. The incident, whatever it was, whether literal or figurative language, took place before Paul wrote I Corinthians. {What doth it profit me?} (\ti moi to ophelos?\). What the profit to me? {Let us eat and drink} (\phagmen kai pimen\). Volitive second aorist subjunctives of \esthi\ and \pin\. Cited from strkjv@Isaiah:22:13|. It is the outcry of the people of Jerusalem during the siege of Jerusalem by the Assyrians. At Anchiale near Tarsus is a statue of Sardanapalus with the inscription: "Eat, drink, enjoy thyself. The rest is nothing." This was the motto of the Epicureans. Paul is not giving his own view, but that of people who deny the resurrection.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:51 @{A mystery} (\mustrion\). He does not claim that he has explained everything. He has drawn a broad parallel which opens the door of hope and confidence. {We shall not all sleep} (\pantes ou koimthsometha\). Future passive indicative of \koimaomai\, to sleep. Not all of us shall die, Paul means. Some people will be alive when he comes. Paul does not affirm that he or any then living will be alive when Jesus comes again. He simply groups all under the phrase "we all." {But we shall all be changed} (\pantes de allagsometha\). Second future passive indicative of \allass\. Both living and dead shall be changed and so receive the resurrection body. See this same idea at more length in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13-18|.
rwp@1John:2:9 @{And hateth his brother} (\kai ton adelphon autou misn\). Sharp contrast between the love just described and hate. The only way to walk in the light (1:7|) is to have fellowship with God who is light (1:3,5|). Songs:the claim to be in the light is nullified by hating a brother. {Even until now} (\hes arti\). Up till this moment. In spite of the increasing light and his own boast he is in the dark.
rwp@1John:3:5 @{He} (\ekeinos\). As in verse 3; strkjv@John:1:18|. {Was manifested} (\ephanerth\). Same form as in verse 2|, but here of the Incarnation as in strkjv@John:21:1|, not of the second coming (1John:2:28|). {To take away sins} (\hina tas hamartias ari\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \air\ as in strkjv@John:1:29|. In strkjv@Isaiah:53:11| we have \anapher\ for bearing sins, but \air\ properly means to lift up and carry away (John:2:16|). Songs:in strkjv@Hebrews:10:4| we find \aphaire\ and strkjv@Hebrews:10:11| \periaire\, to take away sins completely (the complete expiation wrought by Christ on Calvary). The plural \hamartias\ here, as in strkjv@Colossians:1:14|, not singular (collective sense) \hamartian\ as in strkjv@John:1:29|. {And in him is no sin} (\kai hamartia en auti ouk estin\). "And sin (the sinful principle) in him is not." As Jesus had claimed about himself (John:7:18; strkjv@8:46|) and as is repeatedly stated in the N.T. (2Corinthians:5:21; strkjv@Hebrews:4:15; strkjv@7:26; strkjv@9:13|).
rwp@1John:3:10 @{In this} (\en touti\). As already shown. A life of sin is proof that one is a child of the devil and not of God. This is the line of cleavage that is obvious to all. See strkjv@John:8:33-39| for the claim of the Pharisees to be the children of Abraham, whereas their conduct showed them to be children of the devil. This is not a popular note with an age that wishes to remove all distinctions between Christians and the world. {Doeth not righteousness} (\ho m poin dikaiosunn\). Habit (linear present participle) again of not doing righteousness, as in verse 7| of doing it. Cf. \poiei\ and \m poin\ (doing and not doing) in strkjv@Matthew:7:24,26|. {Neither} (\kai\). Literally, "and," but with the ellipsis of \ouk estin ek tou theou\ (is not of God). The addition here of this one item about not loving (\m agapn\) one's brother is like Paul's summary in strkjv@Romans:13:9|, a striking illustration of the general principle just laid down and in accord with strkjv@2:9-11|.
rwp@1John:4:7 @{Of God} (\ek tou theou\). Even human love comes from God, "a reflection of something in the Divine nature itself" (Brooke). John repeats the old commandment of strkjv@2:7f|. Persistence in loving (present tense \agapmen\ indicative and \agapn\ participle) is proof that one "has been begotten of God" (\ek tou theou gegenntai\ as in strkjv@2:29|) and is acquainted with God. Otherwise mere claim to loving God accompanied by hating one's brother is a lie (2:9-11|).
rwp@1John:5:6 @{This} (\houtos\). Jesus the Son of God (verse 5|). {He that came} (\ho elthn\). Second aorist active articular participle of \erchomai\, referring to the Incarnation as a definite historic event, the preexistent Son of God "sent from heaven to do God's will" (Brooke). {By water and blood} (\di' hudatos kai haimatos\). Accompanied by (\dia\ used with the genitive both as instrument and accompaniment, as in strkjv@Galatians:5:13|) water (as at the baptism) and blood (as on the Cross). These two incidents in the Incarnation are singled out because at the baptism Jesus was formally set apart to his Messianic work by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon him and by the Father's audible witness, and because at the Cross his work reached its culmination ("It is finished," Jesus said). There are other theories that do not accord with the language and the facts. It is true that at the Cross both water and blood came out of the side of Jesus when pierced by the soldier, as John bore witness (John:19:34|), a complete refutation of the Docetic denial of an actual human body for Jesus and of the Cerinthian distinction between Jesus and Christ. There is thus a threefold witness to the fact of the Incarnation, but he repeats the twofold witness before giving the third. The repetition of both preposition (\en\ this time rather than \dia\) and the article (\ti\ locative case) argues for two separate events with particular emphasis on the blood ("not only" \ouk monon\, "but" \all'\) which the Gnostics made light of or even denied. {It is the Spirit that beareth witness} (\to pneuma estin to marturoun\). Present active articular participle of \marture\ with article with both subject and predicate, and so interchangeable as in strkjv@3:4|. The Holy Spirit is the third and the chief witness at the baptism of Jesus and all through his ministry. {Because} (\hoti\). Or declarative "that." Either makes sense. In strkjv@John:15:26| Jesus spoke of "the Spirit of truth" (whose characteristic is truth). Here John identifies the Spirit with truth as Jesus said of himself (John:14:6|) without denying personality for the Holy Spirit.
rwp@1John:5:8 @{The Spirit and the water and the blood} (\to pneuma kai to hudr kai to haima\). The same three witnesses of verses 6,7| repeated with the Spirit first. {The three} (\hoi treis\). The resumptive article. {Agree in one} (\eis to hen eisin\). "Are for the one thing," to bring us to faith in Jesus as the Incarnate Son of God, the very purpose for which John wrote his Gospel (20:31|).
rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 65 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR The Epistle is not anonymous, but claims to be written by "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ" (1Peter:1:1|), that is Cephas (Simon Peter). If this is not true, then the book is pseudonymous by a late writer who assumed Peter's name, as in the so-called Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc. "There is no book in the New Testament which has earlier, better, or stronger attestation, though Irenaeus is the first to quote it by name" (Bigg). Eusebius (_H.E_. iii. 25.2) places it among the acknowledged books, those accepted with no doubt at all. We here assume that Simon Peter wrote this Epistle or at any rate dictated it by an amanuensis, as Paul did in Romans (Romans:16:22|). Bigg suggests Silvanus (Silas) as the amanuensis or interpreter (1Peter:5:12|), the obvious meaning of the language (\dia\, through). He may also have been the bearer of the Epistle. It happens that we know more of Peter's life than of any of the twelve apostles because of his prominence in the Gospels and in the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. In the _Student's Chronological New Testament_ I have given a full list of the passages in the Gospels where Peter appears with any clearness and the material is rich and abundant. The account in Acts is briefer, though Peter is the outstanding man in the first five chapters during his career in Jerusalem. After the conversion of Saul he begins to work outside of Jerusalem and after escaping death at the hands of Herod Agrippa I (Acts:12:3ff.|) he left for a while, but is back in Jerusalem at the Conference called by Paul and Barnabas (Acts:15:6-14; Gal strkjv@2:1-10|). After that we have no more about him in Acts, though he reappears in Antioch and is rebuked by Paul for cowardice because of the Judaizers (Galatians:2:11-21). He travelled for the Gospel among the Jews of the Dispersion (Galatians:2:9|) with his wife (1Corinthians:9:5|), and went to Asia Minor (1Peter:1:1|) and as far as Babylon or Rome (1Peter:5:13|). Besides Silvanus he had John Mark with him also (1Peter:5:13|), who was said by the early Christian writers to have been Peter's "interpreter" in his preaching, since Peter was not expert in the Greek (Acts:4:13|), and who also wrote his Gospel under the inspiration of Peter's preaching. We are not able to follow clearly the close of his life or to tell precisely the time of his death. He was apparently put to death in A.D. 67 or 68, but some think that he was executed in Rome in A.D. 64.
rwp@Info_1Peter @ SOME BOOKS Alford, H., Vol. IV. 1 of his _Greek Testament_ (1870). Baldwin, _The Fisherman of Galilee_ (1923). Barnes, _St. Peter in Rome and His Tomb on the Vatican Hill_. Beck, J. T., _Erklarung der Briefe Petri_ (1895). Bennett, W. H., _New-Century Bible_ (1901). Bigg, C., _Intern. Crit. Comm_. (1901). Birks, _Studies in the Life and Character of St. Peter_ (1887). Blenkin, _The First Ep. General of St. Peter_ (1915). Camerlinck, _Commentarius in epistolas catholicas_ (1909). Cooke and Lumby, _Speaker's Comm_. (1881). Couard, _Commentaire_ (1895). Couard, _Simon Petrus der Apostel des Herrn_. Davidson, _St. Peter and His Training_. Elert, _Die Religiositat des Petrus_ (1911). Erbes, _Die Todestage der Apostels Paulus and Petrus_ (1899). Foakes-Jackson, F. J., _Peter Prince of Apostles_ (1927). Foster, Ora D., _The Literary Relations of the First Epistle of Peter_ (1913). Fouard, C., _St. Peter and the First Years of Christianity_ (1892). Gallagher, M., _Was the Apostle Peter Ever at Rome?_ (1894). Goutard, _Essai critique et historique sur la prem. e'pitre de S. Pierre_ (1905). Green, S. G., _The Apostle Peter: His Life and Letters_ (1880). Guignebert, _Lamentations:Primaute' de Pierre et la Venue de Pierre a Rome_ (1909). Gunkel, H., _Die Schriften d. N.T_. 3 Aufl. (1917). Hart, J. H. A., _Expos. Greek Test_. (1910). Henriott, _Saint Pierre_ (1891). Hort, F. J. A., _The First Epistle of St. Peter strkjv@1:1-2:17_ (1898). Howson, J., _Horae Petrinae_ (1883). Jenkins, R. C., _The Apostle Peter. Claims of Catholics_ (1875). Johnstone, _The First Epistle of Peter_ (1888). Kasteren, Van, _Deuteronomy:Eerste Brief Van d. Ap. Petrus_ (1911). Keil, C. F., _Comm. uber die Briefe des Petrus und Juda_ (1883). Knopf, R., _Die Briefe Petri und Juda_ (1912). Kogel, J., _Die Gedankenheit des Ersten Briefes Petri_ (1902). Kuhl, E., _Die Briefe Petri und Judae_ (Meyer Komm., 6 Aufl., 1897). Lietzmann, _Petrus and Paulus in Rom_. Lumby, J. R., _Expositor's Bible_ (1893). Masterman, J. H. B., _Epistles of St. Peter_ (1900). McInnis, J.M., _Simon Peter Fisherman and Philosopher_ (1928). Meyer, F. B., _Peter: Fisherman, Disciple, Apostle_ (1920). Moffatt, James, _Moffatt Comm. on N.T._ (1930). Monneir, J., _Lamentations:premiere e'pitre de l'apotre Pierre_ (1900). Perdelwitz, _Die Mysterienreligion und das Problem des ersten Petrusbriefes_ (1911). Plumptre, _Cambridge Bible_ (1879). Reagan, _The Preaching of Peter, the Beginning of Christian Apologetics_ (1922). Robinson, C. G., _Simon Peter: His Life and Times_ (1889). Ross, J. M. E., _The First Epistle of Peter_ (1913). Salmond, A. D. F., _Schaff's Comm_. (1883). Scharfe, _Die petrinische Stromung der neut. Literatur_ (1893). Schmid, _Petrus in Rome_ (1879). Seeley, _The Life and Writings of St. Peter_. Soden, Von, H., _Hand-Komm_. (3 Aufl., 1899). Taylor, W. M., _Peter the Apostle_ (1876). Thomas, W. H., Griffith, _The Apostle Peter_ (2nd ed., 1905). Thompson, _Life-Work of Peter the Apostle_. Upham, _Simon Peter Shepherd_ (1910). Usteri, J. M., _Wiss. und prakt. Komm. uber den I Petrus- brief_ (1887). Volter, D., _Der I Petrusbrief_ (1906). Weiss, B., _Die erste Petrusbrief und die Kritik_ (1906). _Der petrinische Lehrbegriff_ (1855). Williams, N. M., _American Comm_. Windisch, H., _Die Katholische Briefe. Handbuch zum N.T._ (2 Aufl., 1930). Wohlenberg, G., _Der erste und zweite Petrusbrief und der Judasbrief_. (Zahn Komm., 2 Aufl., 1915.) strkjv@1Peter:1:1 @{Peter} (\Petros\). Greek form for the Aramaic (Chaldaic) \Cphs\, the nickname given Simon by Jesus when he first saw him (John:1:42|) and reaffirmed in the Greek form on his great confession (Matthew:16:18|), with an allusion to \petra\, another form for a rock, ledge, or cliff. In strkjv@2Peter:1:1| we have both \Simn\ and \Petros\. Paul in his Epistles always terms himself Paul, not Saul. Songs:Peter uses this name, not Cephas or Simon, because he is writing to Christians scattered over Asia Minor. The nominative absolute occurs here as in strkjv@James:1:1|, but without \chairein\ as there, the usual form of greeting in letters (Acts:23:26|) so common in the papyri. {An apostle of Jesus Christ} (\apostolos Isou Christou\). This is his official title, but in strkjv@2Peter:1:1| \doulos\ is added, which occurs alone in strkjv@James:1:1|. In II and III John we have only \ho presbuteros\ (the elder), as Peter terms himself \sunpresbuteros\ in strkjv@1Peter:5:1|. Paul's usage varies greatly: only the names in I and II Thessalonians, the title \apostolos\ added and defended in Galatians and Romans as also in I and II Corinthians and Colossians and Ephesians and II Timothy with "by the will of God" added, and in I Timothy with the addition of "according to the command of God." In Philippians Paul has only "\doulos\ (slave) \Christou Isou\," like James and Jude. In Romans and Titus Paul has both \doulos\ and \apostolos\, like II Peter, while in Philemon he uses only \desmios\ (prisoner) \Isou Christou\. {To the elect} (\eklektois\). Without article (with the article in strkjv@Matthew:24:22,24,31|) and dative case, "to elect persons" (viewed as a group). Bigg takes \eklektois\ (old, but rare verbal adjective from \ekleg\, to pick out, to select) as an adjective describing the next word, "to elect sojourners." That is possible and is like \genos eklekton\ in strkjv@2:9|. See the distinction between \kltoi\ (called) and \eklektoi\ (chosen) in strkjv@Matthew:22:14|. {Who are sojourners} (\parepidmois\). Late double compound adjective (\para, epidmountes\, strkjv@Acts:2:10|, to sojourn by the side of natives), strangers sojourning for a while in a particular place. Songs:in Polybius, papyri, in LXX only twice (Genesis:23:4|; 38 or 39 12), in N.T. only here, strkjv@2:11; strkjv@Hebrews:11:13|. The picture in the metaphor here is that heaven is our native country and we are only temporary sojourners here on earth. {Of the Dispersion} (\diaspors\). See strkjv@John:7:35| for literal sense of the word for scattered (from \diaspeir\, to scatter abroad, strkjv@Acts:8:1|) Jews outside of Palestine, and strkjv@James:1:1| for the sense here to Jewish Christians, including Gentile Christians (only N T. examples). Note absence of the article, though a definite conception (of the Dispersion). The Christian is a pilgrim on his way to the homeland. These five Roman provinces include what we call Asia Minor north and west of the Taurus mountain range (Hort). Hort suggests that the order here suggests that Silvanus (bearer of the Epistle) was to land in Pontus from the Euxine Sea, proceed through Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, to Bithynia, where he would re-embark for Rome. This, he holds, explains the separation of Pontus and Bithynia, though the same province. Only Galatia and Asia are mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. as having Christian converts, but the N.T. by no means gives a full account of the spread of the Gospel, as can be judged from strkjv@Colossians:1:6,23|.
rwp@1Peter:1:2 @{According to} (\kata\). Probably to be connected with \eklektois\ rather than with \apostolos\ in spite of a rather loose arrangement of words and the absence of articles in verses 1,2|. {The foreknowledge} (\prognsin\). Late substantive (Plutarch, Lucian, papyri) from \proginsk\ (1:20|), to know beforehand, only twice in N.T. (here and strkjv@Acts:2:23| in Peter's sermon). In this Epistle Peter often uses substantives rather than verbs (cf. strkjv@Romans:8:29|). {Of God the Father} (\theou patros\). Anarthous again and genitive case. See \patr\ applied to God also in strkjv@1:3,17| as often by Paul (Romans:1:7|, etc.). Peter here presents the Trinity (God the Father, the Spirit, Jesus Christ). {In sanctification of the Spirit} (\en hagiasmi pneumatos\). Clearly the Holy Spirit, though anarthrous like \theou patros\. Late word from \hagiaz\, to render holy (\hagios\), to consecrate, as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:7|. The subjective genitive here, sanctification wrought by the Spirit as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:13| (where the Trinity mentioned as here). {Unto obedience} (\eis hupakon\). Obedience (from \hupakou\, to hear under, to hearken) to the Lord Jesus as in strkjv@1:22| "to the truth," result of "the sanctification." {And sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ} (\rantismon haimatos Isou Christou\). Late substantive from \rantiz\, to sprinkle (Hebrews:9:13|), a word used in the LXX of the sacrifices (Numbers:19:9,13,20|, etc.), but not in any non-biblical source so far as known, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:24| (of the sprinkling of blood). Reference to the death of Christ on the Cross and to the ratification of the New Covenant by the blood of Christ as given in strkjv@Hebrews:9:19f.; strkjv@12:24| with allusion to strkjv@Exodus:24:3-8|. Paul does not mention this ritual use of the blood of Christ, but Jesus does (Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Mark:14:24|). Hence it is not surprising to find the use of it by Peter and the author of Hebrews. Hort suggests that Peter may also have an ulterior reference to the blood of the martyrs as in strkjv@Revelation:7:14f.; strkjv@12:11|, but only as illustration of what Jesus did for us, not as having any value. The whole Epistle is a commentary upon \prognsis theou, hagiasmos pneumatos, haima Christou\ (Bigg). Peter is not ashamed of the blood of Christ. {Be multiplied} (\plthunthei\). First aorist passive optative (volitive) of \plthun\, old verb (from \plthus\, fulness), in a wish. Songs:in strkjv@2Peter:1:2; strkjv@Jude:1:2|, but nowhere else in N.T. salutations. Grace and peace (\charis kai eirn\) occur together in strkjv@2Peter:1:2|, in strkjv@2John:1:2| (with \eleos\), and in all Paul's Epistles (with \eleos\ added in I and II Timothy).
rwp@1Peter:1:19 @{But with precious blood} (\alla timii haimati\). Instrumental case of \haima\ after \elutrthte\ (repeated from verse 18|). Peter here applies the old adjective \timios\ (from \tim\, of Christ in strkjv@1Peter:2:7|) to Christ as in strkjv@1:7| \polutimoteron\ to testing of faith. The blood of anyone is "precious" (costly), far above gold or silver, but that of Jesus immeasurably more so. {As of a lamb} (\hs amnou\). This word occurs in strkjv@Leviticus:12:8; strkjv@Numbers:15:11; strkjv@Deuteronomy:14:4| of the lamb prescribed for the passover sacrifice (Exodus:12:5|). John the Baptist applies it to Jesus (John:1:29,36|). It occurs also in strkjv@Acts:8:32| quoted from strkjv@Isaiah:53:7f|. Undoubtedly both the Baptist and Peter have this passage in mind. Elsewhere in the N.T. \arnion\ is used of Christ (Revelation:5:6,12|). Jesus is the Paschal Lamb. Peter sees clearly that it was by the blood of Christ that we are redeemed from sin. {Without blemish} (\ammou\). Without (alpha privative) spot (\mmos\) as the paschal lamb had to be (Leviticus:22:21|). Songs:Hebrews:9:14|. {Without spot} (\aspilou\). Without (alpha privative) stain (\spilos\ spot) as in strkjv@James:1:27; strkjv@2Peter:3:14; strkjv@1Peter:6:14|. {Even the blood of Christ} (\Christou\). Genitive case with \haimati\, but in unusual position for emphasis and clearness with the participles following.
rwp@1Peter:5:1 @{Who am a fellow-elder} (\ho sunpresbuteros\). Earliest use of this compound in an inscription of B.C. 120 for fellow-elders (alderman) in a town, here only in N.T., in eccles. writers. For the word \presbuteros\ in the technical sense of officers in a Christian church (like elder in the local synagogues of the Jews) see strkjv@Acts:11:30; strkjv@20:17|. It is noteworthy that here Peter the Apostle (1:1|) calls himself an elder along with (\sun\) the other "elders." {A witness} (\martus\). This is what Jesus had said they must be (Acts:1:8|) and what Peter claimed to be (Acts:3:15; strkjv@10:39|). Songs:Paul was to be a \martus\ (Acts:22:15|). {Who am also a partaker} (\ho kai koinnos\). "The partner also," "the partaker also." See strkjv@Luke:5:10; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@2Peter:1:4|. See same idea in strkjv@Romans:8:17|. In strkjv@Galatians:3:23; strkjv@Romans:8:18| we have almost this about the glory about to be revealed to us where \mell\ as here is used with the infinitive.
rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ There are excellent commentaries on the Thessalonian Epistles. On the Greek text one may note those by Dibelius, _Handbuch zum N.T. Zweite Auflage_ (1925); Dobschutz, _Meyer-Kommentar_ (1909); Ellicott, _Crit. and Grammat. Comm._ (1884); Findlay, _Cambridge Gk. Test._ (1904); Frame, _Intern. Critical Comm._ (1912); Lightfoot, _Notes on Epistles of Paul_ (1895); Mayer, _Die Thessalonischerbriefe_ (1908); Milligan, _St. Paul's Epistles to the Thess._ (1908); Moffatt, _Expos. Gk. Test._ (1910); Plummer, _First Thess._ (1908), _Second Thess._ (1908); Wohlenberg, _Zahn-Komm. 2 aufl._ (1908). On the English text note those by Adeney, _New Century Bible_ (1907); Denney, _Expos. Bible_ (1892); Findlay, _Cambridge Bible_ (1891); Hutchinson, _Lectures on I & II Thess._ (1883). strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1 @{Paul, and Silvanus, and Timothy} (\Paulos kai Silouanos kai Timotheos\). Nominative absolute as customary in letters. Paul associates with himself Silvanus (Silas of Acts, spelled \Silbanos\ in D and the papyri), a Jew and Roman citizen, and Timothy, son of Jewish mother and Greek father, one of Paul's converts at Lystra on the first tour. They had both been with Paul at Thessalonica, though Timothy is not mentioned by Luke in Acts in Macedonia till Beroea (Acts:17:14f.|). Timothy had joined Paul in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1f.|), had been sent back to Thessalonica, and with Silas had rejoined Paul in Corinth (1Thessalonians:3:5; strkjv@Acts:18:5, strkjv@2Corinthians:1:19|). Silas is the elder and is mentioned first, but neither is in any sense the author of the Epistle any more than Sosthenes is co-author of I Corinthians or Timothy of II Corinthians, though Paul may sometimes have them in mind when he uses "we" in the Epistle. Paul does not here call himself "apostle" as in the later Epistles, perhaps because his position has not been so vigorously attacked as it was later. Ellicott sees in the absence of the word here a mark of the affectionate relations existing between Paul and the Thessalonians. {Unto the church of the Thessalonians} (\ti ekklsii Thessaloniken\). The dative case in address. Note absence of the article with \Thessaloniken\ because a proper name and so definite without it. This is the common use of \ekklsia\ for a local body (church). The word originally meant "assembly" as in strkjv@Acts:19:39|, but it came to mean an organization for worship whether assembled or unassembled (cf. strkjv@Acts:8:3|). The only superscription in the oldest Greek manuscripts (Aleph B A) is \Pros Thessalonikeis A\ ({To the Thessalonians First}). But probably Paul wrote no superscription and certainly he would not write A to it before he had written II Thessalonians (B). His signature at the close was the proof of genuineness (2Thessalonians:3:17|) against all spurious claimants (2Thessalonians:2:2|). Unfortunately the brittle papyrus on which he wrote easily perished outside of the sand heaps and tombs of Egypt or the lava covered ruins of Herculaneum. What a treasure that autograph would be! {In God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ} (\en thei patri kai kurii Jsou Christi\). This church is grounded in (\en\, with the locative case) and exists in the sphere and power of {God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ}. No article in the Greek, for both \thei patri\ and \kurii Jsou Christi\ are treated as proper names. In the very beginning of this first Epistle of Paul we meet his Christology. He at once uses the full title, "Lord Jesus Christ," with all the theological content of each word. The name "Jesus" (Saviour, strkjv@Matthew:1:21|) he knew, as the "Jesus of history," the personal name of the Man of Galilee, whom he had once persecuted (Acts:9:5|), but whom he at once, after his conversion, proclaimed to be "the Messiah," (\ho Christos\, strkjv@Acts:9:22|). This position Paul never changed. In the great sermon at Antioch in Pisidia which Luke has preserved (Acts:13:23|) Paul proved that God fulfilled his promise to Israel by raising up "Jesus as Saviour" (\stra Isoun\). Now Paul follows the Christian custom by adding \Christos\ (verbal from \chri\, to anoint) as a proper name to Jesus (Jesus Christ) as later he will often say "Christ Jesus" (Colossians:1:1|). And he dares also to apply \kurios\ (Lord) to "Jesus Christ," the word appropriated by Claudius (_Dominus_, \Kurios\) and other emperors in the emperor-worship, and also common in the Septuagint for God as in strkjv@Psalms:32:1f.| (quoted by Paul in strkjv@Romans:4:8|). Paul uses \Kurios\ of God (1Corinthians:3:5|) or of Jesus Christ as here. In fact, he more frequently applies it to Christ when not quoting the Old Testament as in strkjv@Romans:4:8|. And here he places "the Lord Jesus Christ" in the same category and on the same plane with "God the father." There will be growth in Paul's Christology and he will never attain all the knowledge of Christ for which he longs (Phillipians:3:10-12|), but it is patent that here in his first Epistle there is no "reduced Christ" for Paul. He took Jesus as "Lord" when he surrendered to Jesus on the Damascus Road: "And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said to me" (Acts:22:10|). It is impossible to understand Paul without seeing clearly this first and final stand for the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul did not get this view of Jesus from current views of Mithra or of Isis or any other alien faith. The Risen Christ became at once for Paul the Lord of his life. {Grace to you and peace} (\charis humin kai eirn\). These words, common in Paul's Epistles, bear "the stamp of Paul's experience" (Milligan). They are not commonplace salutations, but the old words "deepened and spiritualised" (Frame). The infinitive (\chairein\) so common in the papyri letters and seen in the New Testament also (Acts:15:23; strkjv@23:26; strkjv@James:1:1|) here gives place to \charis\, one of the great words of the New Testament (cf. strkjv@John:1:16f.|) and particularly of the Pauline Epistles. Perhaps no one word carries more meaning for Paul's messages than this word \charis\ (from \chair\, rejoice) from which \charizomai\ comes. {Peace} (\eirn\) is more than the Hebrew _shalm_ so common in salutations. One recalls the "peace" that Christ leaves to us (John:14:27|) and the peace of God that passes all understanding (Phillipians:4:7|). This introduction is brief, but rich and gracious and pitches the letter at once on a high plane.
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:3 @{Exhortation} (\paraklsis\). Persuasive discourse, calling to one's side, for admonition, encouragement, or comfort. {Not of error} (\ouk ek plans\). This word is same as \plana\, to lead astray (2Timothy:3:13|) like Latin _errare_. Passive idea of {error} here rather than deceit. That is seen in {nor in guile} (\oude en doli\) from \del\, to catch with bait. Paul is keenly sensitive against charges against the correctness of his message and the purity of his life. {Nor of uncleanness} (\oude ex akatharsias\). "This disclaimer, startling as it may seem, was not unneeded amidst the impurities consecrated by the religions of the day" (Lightfoot). There was no necessary connection in the popular mind between religion and morals. The ecstatic initiations in some of the popular religions were grossly sensual.
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:4 @{But even as we have been approved by God} (\alla kaths dedokimasmetha hupo tou theou\). Perfect passive indicative of \dokimaz\, old verb to put to the test, but here the tense for completed state means tested and proved and so approved by God. Paul here claims the call of God for his ministry and the seal of God's blessing on his work and also for that of Silas and Timothy. {To be entrusted with the gospel} (\pisteuthnai to euaggelion\). First aorist passive infinitive of \pisteu\, common verb for believing, from \pistis\ (faith), but here to entrust rather than to trust. The accusative of the thing is retained in the passive according to regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:17; strkjv@Galatians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:3:2; strkjv@1Timothy:1:11; strkjv@Titus:1:3|, though the active had the dative of the person. {Songs:we speak} (\houts laloumen\). Simple, yet confident claim of loyalty to God's call and message. Surely this should be the ambition of every preacher of the gospel of God. {Not as pleasing men} (\ouch hs anthrpois areskontes\). Dative case with \aresk\ as in strkjv@Galatians:1:10|. Few temptations assail the preacher more strongly than this one to please men, even if God is not pleased, though with the dim hope that God will after all condone or overlook. Nothing but experience will convince some preachers how fickle is popular favour and how often it is at the cost of failure to please God. And yet the preacher wishes to win men to Christ. It is all as subtle as it is deceptive. God tests our hearts (the very verb \dokimaz\ used in the beginning of this verse) and he is the only one whose approval matters in the end of the day (1Corinthians:4:5|).
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:6 @{Nor seeking glory of men} (\oute ztountes ex anthrpn doxan\). "Upon the repudiation of covetousness follows naturally the repudiation of worldly ambition" (Milligan). See strkjv@Acts:20:19; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:5; strkjv@Ephesians:4:2|. This third disclaimer is as strong as the other two. Paul and his associates had not tried to extract praise or glory out of (\ex\) men. {Neither from you nor from others} (\oute aph' humn oute aph' alln\). He widens the negation to include those outside of the church circles and changes the preposition from \ex\ (out of) to \apo\ (from). {When we might have been burdensome, as apostles of Christ} (\dunamenoi en barei einai hs Christou apostoloi\). Westcott and Hort put this clause in verse 7|. Probably a concessive participle, {though being able to be in a position of weight} (either in matter of finance or of dignity, or a burden on your funds or "men of weight" as Moffatt suggests). Milligan suggests that Paul "plays here on the double sense of the phrase" like the Latin proverb: _Honos propter onus_. Songs:he adds, including Silas and Timothy, {as Christ's apostles}, as missionaries clearly, whether in the technical sense or not (cf. strkjv@Acts:14:4,14; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:23; strkjv@11:13; strkjv@Romans:16:7; strkjv@Phillipians:2:25; strkjv@Revelation:2:2|). They were entitled to pay as "Christ's apostles" (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:7ff.|), though they had not asked for it.
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:13 @{And for this cause we also} (\kai dia touto kai hmeis\). Note \kai\ twice. We as well as you are grateful for the way the gospel was received in Thessalonica. {Without ceasing} (\adialeipts\). Late adverb for which see on strkjv@1:2| and for \eucharistoumen\ see on ¯1:2|. {The word of the message} (\logon akos\). Literally, {the word of} hearing, as in Sir. strkjv@42:1 and strkjv@Hebrews:4:2| \ho logos ts akos\, the word marked by hearing (genitive case), the word which you heard. Here with \tou theou\ (of God) added as a second descriptive genitive which Paul expands and justifies. {Ye received it so} (\paralabontes\) and {accepted or welcomed it} (\edexasthe\) so, {not as the word of men} (\ou logou anthrpn\), {but as the word of God} (\alla logon theou\), {as it is in truth} (\kaths alths estin\). This last clause is literally, {as it truly is}. Paul had not a doubt that he was proclaiming God's message. Should any preacher preach his doubts if he has any? God's message can be found and Paul found it. {Worketh in you} (\energeitai en humin\). Perhaps middle voice of \energe\ (\en, ergon\, work) late verb, not in ancient Greek or LXX, but in papyri and late writers (Polybius, etc.) and in N.T. only by Paul and James. If it is passive, as Milligan thinks, it means "is set in operation," as Polybius has it. The idea then is that the word of God is set in operation in you that believe.
rwp@1Thessalonians:4:7 @{Not for uncleanness, but in sanctification} (\epi akatharsii all' en hagiasmi\). Sharp contrast made still sharper by the two prepositions \epi\ (on the basis of) and \en\ (in the sphere of). God has "called" us all for a decent sex life consonant with his aims and purposes. It was necessary for Paul to place this lofty ideal before the Thessalonian Christians living in a pagan world. It is equally important now.
rwp@1Thessalonians:4:11 @{That ye study to be quiet} (\philotimeisthai hsuchazein\). First infinitive dependent on \parakaloumen\ (verse 10|, we exhort you), the second on \philotimeisthai\ (old verb from \philotimos\, fond of honour, \philos, tim\). The notion of ambition appears in each of the three N.T. examples (1Thessalonians:4:11; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:9; strkjv@Romans:5:20|), but it is ambition to do good, not evil. The word ambition is Latin (_ambitio_ from _ambo, ire_), to go on both sides to accomplish one's aims and often evil). A preacher devoid of ambition lacks power. There was a restless spirit in Thessalonica because of the misapprehension of the second coming. Songs:Paul urges an ambition to be quiet or calm, to lead a quiet life, including silence (Acts:11:18|). {To do your own business} (\prassein ta idia\). Present infinitive like the others, to have the habit of attending to their own affairs (\ta idia\). This restless meddlesomeness here condemned Paul alludes to again in strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:11| in plainer terms. It is amazing how much wisdom people have about other people's affairs and so little interest in their own. {To work with your own hands} (\ergazesthai tais chersin humn\). Instrumental case (\chersin\). Paul gave a new dignity to manual labour by precept and example. There were "pious" idlers in the church in Thessalonica who were promoting trouble. He had commanded them when with them.
rwp@1Thessalonians:4:15 @{By the word of the Lord} (\en logi Kuriou\). We do not know to what word of the Lord Jesus Paul refers, probably Paul meaning only the point in the teaching of Christ rather than a quotation. He may be claiming a direct revelation on this important matter as about the Lord's Supper in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:23|. Jesus may have spoken on this subject though it has not been preserved to us (cf. strkjv@Mark:9:1|). {Ye that are alive} (\hmeis hoi zntes\). Paul here includes himself, but this by no means shows that Paul knew that he would be alive at the Parousia of Christ. He was alive, not dead, when he wrote. {Shall in no wise precede} (\ou m phthasmen\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \phthan\, to come before, to anticipate. This strong negative with \ou m\ (double negative) and the subjunctive is the regular idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 929). Hence there was no ground for uneasiness about the dead in Christ.
rwp@1Timothy:1:5 @{The end} (\to telos\). See strkjv@Romans:6:21; strkjv@10:4| for \telos\ (the good aimed at, reached, result, end). {Love} (\agap\). Not "questionings." strkjv@Romans:13:9|. "Three conditions for the growth of love" (Parry): "Out of a pure heart" (\ek katharas kardias\, O.T. conception), "and a good conscience" (\kai suneidses agaths\, for which see strkjv@Romans:2:25|), "and faith unfeigned" (\kai pistes anupokritou\, late compound verbal in strkjv@2Corinthians:6:6; strkjv@Romans:12:9|).
rwp@1Timothy:2:9 @{In like manner that women} (\hosauts gunaikas\). \Boulomai\ must be repeated from verse 8|, involved in \hosauts\ (old adverb, as in strkjv@Romans:8:26|). Parry insists that \proseuchomenas\ (when they pray) must be supplied also. Grammatically that is possible (Lock), but it is hardly consonant with verses 11-15| (White). {Adorn themselves} (\kosmein heautas\). Present active infinitive after \boulomai\ understood. Old word from \kosmos\ (arrangement, ornament, order, world). See strkjv@Luke:21:5; strkjv@Titus:2:10|. See strkjv@1Corinthians:11:5ff.| for Paul's discussion of women's dress in public worship. {In modest apparel} (\en katastoli kosmii\). \Katastol\ is a late word (a letting down, \katastell\, of demeanour or dress, arrangement of dress). Only here in N.T. \Kosmios\ is old adjective from \kosmos\ and means well-arranged, becoming. W. H. have adverb in margin (\kosmis\). {With shamefastness} (\meta aidous\). Old word for shame, reverence, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:12:28|. {Sobriety} (\sphrosuns\). Old word, in N.T. only here, verse 15|, and strkjv@Acts:26:15| (Paul also). {Not with braided hair} (\m en plegmasin\). Old word from \plek\, to plait, to braid, for nets, baskets, here only in N.T. Cf. strkjv@1Peter:3:1| (\emploks\). {And gold} (\en chrusii\). Locative case with \en\ repeated. Some MSS. read \chrusi\. Both used for gold ornaments. {Or pearls} (\ margaritais\). See strkjv@Matthew:7:6| for this word. {Or costly raiment} (\ himatismi polutelei\). \Himatismos\ a common _Koin_ word from \himatiz\, to clothe. \Polutels\, old word from \polus\ and \telos\ (great price). See strkjv@Mark:14:3|.
rwp@1Timothy:3:16 @{Without controversy} (\homologoumens\). Old adverb from the participle \homologoumenos\ from \homologe\. Here only in N.T. "Confessedly." {Great} (\mega\). See strkjv@Ephesians:5:32|. "A great mystery." {The mystery of godliness} (\to ts eusebeias mustrion\). See verse 9| "the mystery of the faith," and strkjv@2:2| for \eusebeia\. Here the phrase explains "a pillar and stay of the truth" (verse 15|). See in particular Co strkjv@1:27|. "The revealed secret of true religion, the mystery of Christianity, the Person of Christ" (Lock). {He who} (\hos\). The correct text, not \theos\ (God) the reading of the Textus Receptus (Syrian text) nor \ho\ (neuter relative, agreeing with \mustrion\) the reading of the Western documents. Westcott and Hort print this relative clause as a fragment of a Christian hymn (like strkjv@Ephesians:5:14|) in six strophes. That is probably correct. At any rate \hos\ (who) is correct and there is asyndeton (no connective) in the verbs. Christ, to whom \hos\ refers, is the mystery (Colossians:1:27; strkjv@2:2|). {Was manifested} (\ephanerth\). First aorist passive indicative of \phanero\, to manifest. Here used to describe the incarnation (\en sarki\) of Christ (an answer also to the Docetic Gnostics). The verb is used by Paul elsewhere of the incarnation (Romans:16:26; strkjv@Colossians:1:26|) as well as of the second coming (Colossians:3:4|). {Justified in the spirit} (\edikaith en pneumati\). First aorist passive indicative of \dikaio\, to declare righteous, to vindicate. Christ was vindicated in his own spirit (Hebrews:9:14|) before men by overcoming death and rising from the dead (Romans:1:3f.|). {Seen of angels} (\phth aggelois\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora\, to see, with either the instrumental or the dative case of angels (\aggelois\). The words were probably suggested by the appearance of Jesus (\phth\, the usual form for the resurrection appearances of Christ) of the angels at the tomb and at the ascension of Christ. See strkjv@Phillipians:2:10; strkjv@1Peter:3:22| for the appearance of Jesus to the angels in heaven at the ascension. Some would take "angels" here to be "messengers" (the women). {Preached among the nations} (\ekruchth en ethnesin\). First aorist passive indicative of \kruss\, to proclaim. The word \ethnos\ may mean "all creation" (Colossians:1:23|) and not just Gentiles as distinct from Jews. Paul had done more of this heralding of Christ among the Gentiles than any one else. It was his glory (Ephesians:3:1,8|). Cf. strkjv@2:7|. {Believed on in the world} (\episteuth en kosmi\). First aorist indicative passive again of \pisteu\, to believe (2Thessalonians:1:10|). Cf. strkjv@1:15; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. {Received up in glory} (\anelmphth en doxi\). First aorist passive again (six verbs in the same voice and tense in succession, a rhythmic arrangement like a hymn). Cf. strkjv@Romans:8:29f|. This time the verb is \analamban\, the verb used of the ascension (Acts:1:11,22|, which see). In a wonderful way this stanza of a hymn presents the outline of the life of Christ.
rwp@1Timothy:4:1 @{Expressly} (\rts\). Late adverb, here alone in N.T., from verbal adjective \rtos\ (from root \re\). The reference is to the Holy Spirit, but whether to O.T. prophecy (Acts:1:16|) or to some Christian utterance (2Thessalonians:2:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:1ff.|) we do not know. Parry recalls the words of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:24:10,24|. {In later times} (\en husterois kairois\). Old adjective (Matthew:21:31|) usually as adverb, \husteron\ (Matthew:4:2|). Relative time from the prediction, now coming true (a present danger). {Some shall fall away} (\apostsontai tines\). Future middle of \aphistmi\, intransitive use, shall stand off from, to fall away, apostatize (2Corinthians:12:8|). {From the faith} (\ts pistes\). Ablative case (separation). Not creed, but faith in God through Christ. {Giving heed} (\prosechontes\). Supply \ton noun\ (the mind) as in strkjv@3:8|. {Seducing spirits} (\pneumasin planois\). Old adjective (\plan\, wandering), here active sense (deceiving). As substantive in strkjv@2Corinthians:6:8|. Probably some heathen or the worst of the Gnostics. {Doctrines of devils} (\didaskaliais daimonin\). "Teachings of \daimons\." Definite explanation of the preceding. Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:10:20f|.
rwp@1Timothy:5:8 @{Provideth not for his own} (\tn idin ou pronoei\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and present active (or middle \pronoeitai\) indicative of \pronoe\, old verb, to think beforehand. Pauline word in N.T. only here, strkjv@2Corinthians:8:21; strkjv@Romans:12:7|. With genitive case. {He hath denied the faith} (\tn pistin rntai\). Perfect middle indicative of old verb \arneomai\. His act of impiety belies (Titus:1:16|) his claim to the faith (Revelation:2:13|). {Worse than an unbeliever} (\apistou cheirn\). Ablative case of \apistou\ after the comparative \cheirn\. Who makes no profession of piety.
rwp@2Corinthians:3:10 @{In this respect} (\en touti ti merei\). The glory on the face of Moses was temporary, though real, and passed away (verse 7|), a type of the dimming of the glory of the old dispensation by the brightness of the new. The moon makes a dim light after the sun rises, "is not glorified" (\ou dedoxastai\, perfect passive indicative of \doxaz\). {By reason of the glory that surpasseth} (\heineken ts huperballouss doxs\). The surpassing (\huper-ball\, throwing beyond) glory. Christ as the Sun of Righteousness has thrown Moses in the shade. Cf. the claims of superiority by Christ in strkjv@Matthew:5-7|.
rwp@2Corinthians:3:11 @{Passeth away} (\katargoumenon\). In process of disappearing before the gospel of Christ. {Remaineth} (\menon\). The new ministry is permanent. This claim may be recommended to those who clamour for a new religion. Christianity is still alive and is not dying. Note also \en doxi\, in glory, in contrast with \dia doxs\, with glory. {Boldness} (\parrsii\). Instrumental case after \chrmetha\. Old word, \panrsis=parrsis\, telling it all, absolute unreservedness. Surely Paul has kept nothing back here, no mental reservations, in this triumphant claim of superiority.
rwp@2Corinthians:4:4 @{The god of this world} (\ho theos tou ainos toutou\). "Age," more exactly, as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:20|. Satan is "the god of this age," a phrase nowhere else in the N.T., but Jesus uses the same idea in strkjv@John:12:31; strkjv@14:30| and Paul in strkjv@Ephesians:2:2; strkjv@6:12| and John in strkjv@1John:5:19|. Satan claimed the rule over the world in the temptations with Jesus. {Blinded} (\etuphlsen\). First aorist active of \tuphlo\, old verb to blind (\tuphlos\, blind). They refused to believe (\apistn\) and so Satan got the power to blind their thoughts. That happens with wilful disbelievers. {The light} (\ton phtismon\). The illumination, the enlightening. Late word from \photiz\, to give light, in Plutarch and LXX. In N.T. only in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4,6|. Accusative case of general reference here with the articular infinitive (\eis to m augasai\ that should not dawn). That is, if \augasai\ is intransitive as is likely, though it is transitive in the old poets (from \aug\, radiance. Cf. German _Auge_=eye). If it is transitive, the idea would be "that they should not see clearly the illumination, etc."
rwp@2Corinthians:5:9 @{We make it our aim} (\philotimoumetha\). Old and common verb, present middle, from \philotimos\ (\philos, tim\, fond of honour), to act from love of honour, to be ambitious in the good sense (1Thessalonians:4:11; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:9; strkjv@Romans:15:20|). The Latin _ambitio_ has a bad sense from _ambire_, to go both ways to gain one's point. {To be well-pleasing to him} (\euarestoi auti einai\). Late adjective that shows Paul's loyalty to Christ, his Captain. Found in several inscriptions in the _Koin_ period (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 214; Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_).
rwp@2Corinthians:5:21 @{Him who knew no sin} (\ton m gnonta hamartian\). Definite claim by Paul that Jesus did not commit sin, had no personal acquaintance (\m gnonta\, second aorist active participle of \ginsk\) with it. Jesus made this claim for himself (John:8:46|). This statement occurs also in strkjv@1Peter:2:22; strkjv@Hebrews:4:15; strkjv@7:26; strkjv@1John:3:5|. Christ was and is "a moral miracle" (Bernard) and so more than mere man. {He made to be sin} (\hamartian epoisen\). The words "to be" are not in the Greek. "Sin" here is the substantive, not the verb. God "treated as sin" the one "who knew no sin." But he knew the contradiction of sinners (Hebrews:12:3|). We may not dare to probe too far into the mystery of Christ's suffering on the Cross, but this fact throws some light on the tragic cry of Jesus just before he died: "My God, My God, why didst thou forsake me?" (Matthew:27:46|). {That we might become} (\hina hmeis genmetha\). Note "become." This is God's purpose (\hina\) in what he did and in what Christ did. Thus alone can we obtain God's righteousness (Romans:1:17|).
rwp@2Corinthians:10:1 @{Now I Paul myself} (\Autos de eg Paulos\). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:5:2|. Paul now turns to the third part of the epistle in chapters 10-13| in which he vigorously defends himself against the accusations of the stubborn minority of Judaizers in Corinth. Great ministers of Christ through the ages have had to pass through fiery trials like these. Paul has shown the way for us all. He speaks of himself now plainly, but under compulsion, as is clear. It may be that at this point he took the pen from the amanuensis and wrote himself as in strkjv@Galatians:6:11|. {By the meekness and gentleness of Christ} (\dia tes prauttos kai epieikias tou Christou\). This appeal shows (Plummer) that Paul had spoken to the Corinthians about the character of Christ. Jesus claimed meekness for himself (Matthew:11:29|) and felicitated the meek (Matthew:5:5|) and he exemplified it abundantly (Luke:23:34|). See on ¯Matthew:5:15; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:21| for this great word that has worn thin with us. Plutarch combines \prauts\ with \epieikia\ as Paul does here. Matthew Arnold suggested "sweet reasonableness" for \epieikeia\ in Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch. It is in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:24:4| (\to epieikes\ in strkjv@Phillipians:4:5|). In Greek Ethics the equitable man was called \epieiks\, a man who does not press for the last farthing of his rights (Bernard). {Lowly among you} (\tapeinos en humin\). The bad use of \tapeinos\, the old use, but here alone in N.T. in that meaning. Socrates and Aristotle used it for littleness of soul. Probably Paul here is quoting one of the sneers of his traducers in Corinth about his humble conduct while with them (1Corinthians:2:23; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:6|) and his boldness (\apn tharr\) when away (1Corinthians:7:16|). "It was easy to satirize and misrepresent a depression of spirits, a humility of demeanour, which were either the direct results of some bodily affliction, or which the consciousness of this affliction had rendered habitual" (Farrar). The words stung Paul to the quick.
rwp@2Corinthians:10:5 @{Casting down imaginations} (\logismous kathairountes\). The same military figure (\kathairesis\) and the present active participle agreeing with \strateuometha\ in verse 3| (verse 4| a parenthesis). The reasonings or imaginations (\logismous\, old word from \logizomai\, to reckon, only here in N.T. and strkjv@Romans:2:15|) are treated as forts or citadels to be conquered. {Every high thing that is exalted} (\pan hupsma epairomenon\). Same metaphor. \Hupsma\ from \hupso\ is late _Koin_ word (in LXX, Plutarch, Philo, papyri) for height and that figure carried on by \epairomenon\. Paul aims to pull down the top-most perch of audacity in their reasonings against the knowledge of God. We need Paul's skill and courage today. {Bringing every thought into captivity} (\aichmaltizontes pn noma\). Present active participle of \aichmaltiz\, common _Koin_ verb from \aichmaltos\, captive in war (\aichm\, spear, \haltos\ verbal of \haliskomai\, to be taken). See on ¯Luke:21:24|. Paul is the most daring of thinkers, but he lays all his thoughts at the feet of Jesus. For \noma\ (device) see on ¯2:11|. {To the obedience of Christ} (\eis tn hupakon tou Christou\). Objective genitive, "to the obedience unto Christ." That is Paul's conception of intellectual liberty, freedom in Christ. Deissmann (_St. Paul_, p. 141) calls this "the mystic genitive."
rwp@2Corinthians:12:1 @{I must needs glory} (\kauchasthai dei\). This is the reading of B L Latin Syriac, but Aleph D Bohairic have \de\ while K M read \d\. The first is probably correct. He must go on with the glorying already begun, foolish as it is, though it is not expedient (\ou sumpheron\). {Visions} (\optasias\). Late word from \optaz\. See on ¯Luke:1:22; strkjv@Acts:26:19|. {Revelations of the Lord} (\apokalupseis Kuriou\). Unveilings (from \apokalupt\ as in strkjv@Revelation:1:1|). See on ¯2Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:7; strkjv@14:26|. Paul had both repeated visions of Christ (Acts:9:3; strkjv@16:9; strkjv@18:9; strkjv@22:17; strkjv@27:23f.|) and revelations. He claimed to speak by direct revelation (1Corinthians:11:23; strkjv@15:3; strkjv@Galatians:1:12; strkjv@Ephesians:3:3|, etc.).
rwp@2John:1:9 @{Whosoever goeth onward} (\ps ho proagn\). "Every one who goes ahead. \Proag\ literally means to go on before (Mark:11:9|). That in itself is often the thing to do, but here the bad sense comes out by the parallel clause. {And abideth not in the teaching of Christ} (\kai m menn en ti didachi tou Christou\). Not the teaching about Christ, but that of Christ which is the standard of Christian teaching as the walk of Christ is the standard for the Christian's walk (1John:2:6|). See strkjv@John:7:16; strkjv@18:19|. These Gnostics claimed to be the progressives, the advanced thinkers, and were anxious to relegate Christ to the past in their onward march. This struggle goes on always among those who approach the study of Christ. Is he a "landmark" merely or is he our goal and pattern? Progress we all desire, but progress toward Christ, not away from him. Reactionary obscurantists wish no progress toward Christ, but desire to stop and camp where they are. "True progress includes the past" (Westcott). Jesus Christ is still ahead of us all calling us to come on to him.
rwp@2Peter:1:2 @{Be multiplied} (\plthunthei\). First aorist passive optative of \plthun\ in a wish for the future (volitive use) as in strkjv@1Peter:1:2; strkjv@Jude:1:2|. {In the knowledge} (\en epignsei\). Full (additional, \epi\) knowledge as in strkjv@1:8| (only \gnsis\ in strkjv@1:5,6; strkjv@3:18|), but \epignsin\ again in strkjv@1:3,8; strkjv@2:20|. As in Colossians, so here full knowledge is urged against the claims of the Gnostic heretics to special \gnsis\. {Of God and of Jesus our Lord} (\tou theou kai Isou tou kuriou hmn\). At first sight the idiom here seems to require one person as in strkjv@1:1|, though there is a second article (\tou\) before \kuriou\, and \Isou\ is a proper name. But the text here is very uncertain. Bengel, Spitta, Zahn, Nestle accept the short reading of P and some Vulgate MSS. and some minuscles with only \tou kuriou hmn\ (our Lord) from which the three other readings may have come. Elsewhere in II Peter \gnsis\ and \epignsis\ are used of Christ alone. The text of II Peter is not in a good state of preservation.
rwp@2Peter:3:15 @{In his sight} (\auti\). Ethical dative. Referring to Christ. {Is salvation} (\strian\). Predicate accusative after \hgeisthe\ in apposition with \makrothumian\ (long-suffering), an opportunity for repentance (cf. strkjv@1Peter:3:20|). The Lord here is Christ. {Our beloved brother Paul} (\ho agaptos adelphos Paulos\). Paul applies the verbal \agaptos\ (beloved) to Epaphras (Colossians:1:7|), Onesimus (Colossians:4:9; strkjv@Philemon:1:16|), to Tychicus (Colossians:4:7; strkjv@Ephesians:6:21|), and to four brethren in strkjv@Romans:16| (Epainetus strkjv@Romans:16:5|, Ampliatus strkjv@Romans:16:8|, Stachys strkjv@Romans:16:9|, Persis strkjv@Romans:16:12|). It is not surprising for Peter to use it of Paul in view of Gal strkjv@2:9f.|, in spite of strkjv@Galatians:2:11-14|. {Given to him} (\dotheisan auti\). First aorist passive participle of \didmi\ with dative case. Peter claimed wisdom for himself, but recognises that Paul had the gift also. His language here may have caution in it as well as commendation. "St. Peter speaks of him with affection and respect, yet maintains the right to criticise" (Bigg).
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:1:12 @{That} (\hops\). Rare with Paul compared with \hina\ (1Corinthians:1:29; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:14|). Perhaps here for variety (dependent on \hina\ clause in verse 11|). {The name} (\to onoma\). The Old Testament (LXX) uses \onoma\ embodying the revealed character of Jehovah. Songs:here the {Name} of our Lord Jesus means the Messiahship and Lordship of Jesus. The common Greek idiom of \onoma\ for title or dignity as in the papyri (Milligan) is not quite this idiom. The papyri also give examples of \onoma\ for person as in O.T. and strkjv@Acts:1:15| (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 196ff.). {In you, and ye in him} (\en humin, kai humeis en auti\). This reciprocal glorying is Pauline, but it is also like Christ's figure of the vine and the branches in strkjv@John:15:1-11|. {According to the grace} (\kata tn charin\). Not merely standard, but also aim (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 609). {Of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ} (\tou theou hmn kai kuriou Isou Christou\). Here strict syntax requires, since there is only one article with \theou\ and \kuriou\ that one person be meant, Jesus Christ, as is certainly true in strkjv@Titus:2:13; strkjv@2Peter:1:1| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p.786). This otherwise conclusive syntactical argument, admitted by Schmiedel, is weakened a bit by the fact that \Kurios\ is often employed as a proper name without the article, a thing not true of \str\ in strkjv@Titus:2:13; strkjv@2Peter:1:1|. Songs:in strkjv@Ephesians:5:5| \en ti basileii tou Christou kai theou\ the natural meaning is {in the Kingdom of Christ and God} regarded as one, but here again \theos\, like \Kurios\, often occurs as a proper name without the article. Songs:it has to be admitted that here Paul may mean "according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ," though he may also mean "according to the grace of our God and Lord, Jesus Christ."
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:2 @{To the end that} (\eis to\). One of Paul's favourite idioms for purpose, \eis to\ and the infinitive. {Ye be not quickly shaken} (\m taches saleuthnai humas\). First aorist passive infinitive of \saleu\, old verb to agitate, to cause to totter like a reed (Matthew:11:7|), the earth (Hebrews:12:26|). Usual negative \m\ and accusative of general reference \humas\ with the infinitive. {From your mind} (\apo tou noos\). Ablative case of nous, mind, reason, sober sense, "from your witte" (Wyclif), to "keep their heads." {Nor yet be troubled} (\mde throeisthai\). Old verb \throe\, to cry aloud (from \throos\, clamour, tumult), to be in a state of nervous excitement (present passive infinitive, as if it were going on), "a continued state of agitation following the definite shock received (\saleuthnai\)" (Milligan). {Either by spirit} (\mte dia pneumatos\). By ecstatic utterance (1Thessalonians:5:10|). The nervous fear that the coming was to be at once prohibited by \mde\ Paul divides into three sources by \mte, mte, mte\. No individual claim to divine revelation (the gift of prophecy) can justify the statement. {Or by word} (\mte dia logou\). Oral statement of a conversation with Paul (Lightfoot) to this effect {as from us}. An easy way to set aside Paul's first Epistle by report of a private remark from Paul. {Or by epistle as from us} (\mte di' epistols hs di' hmn\). In strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:13-5:3| Paul had plainly said that Jesus would come as a thief in the night and had shown that the dead would not be left out in the rapture. But evidently some one claimed to have a private epistle from Paul which supported the view that Jesus was coming at once, {as that the day of the Lord is now present} (\hs hoti enestken h hmera tou kuriou\). Perfect active indicative of \enistmi\, old verb, to place in, but intransitive in this tense to stand in or at or near. Songs:"is imminent" (Lightfoot). The verb is common in the papyri. In strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22; strkjv@Romans:8:38| we have a contrast between \ta enestta\, the things present, and \ta mellonta\, the things future (to come). The use of \hs hoti\ may be disparaging here, though that is not true in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. In the _Koin_ it comes in the vernacular to mean simply "that" (Moulton, _Proleg_., p. 212), but that hardly seems the case in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1033). Here it means "to wit that," though "as that" or "as if" does not miss it much. Certainly it flatly denies that by conversation or by letter he had stated that the second coming was immediately at hand. "It is this misleading assertion that accounts both for the increased discouragement of the faint-hearted to encourage whom Paul writes strkjv@1:3-2:17|, and for the increased meddlesomeness of the idle brethren to warn whom Paul writes strkjv@3:1-18|" (Frame). It is enough to give one pause to note Paul's indignation over this use of his name by one of the over-zealous advocates of the view that Christ was coming at once. It is true that Paul was still alive, but, if such a "pious fraud" was so common and easily condoned as some today argue, it is difficult to explain Paul's evident anger. Moreover, Paul's words should make us hesitate to affirm that Paul definitely proclaimed the early return of Jesus. He hoped for it undoubtedly, but he did not specifically proclaim it as so many today assert and accuse him of misleading the early Christians with a false presentation.
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:3 @{Let no man beguile you in any wise} (\m tis humas exapatsi kata mdena tropon\). First aorist active subjunctive of \exapata\ (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb \apata\) with double negative (\m tis, mdena\) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:11| rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in strkjv@Mark:13:15| (\m katabat\). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes "tricks" of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion. {For it will not be} (\hoti\). There is an ellipse here of \ouk estai\ (or \gensetai\) to be supplied after \hoti\. Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 4|. The meaning is clear. \Hoti\ is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2|. {Except the falling away come first} (\ean m elthi h apostasia prton\). Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. \Apostasia\ is the late form of \apostasis\ and is our word apostasy. Plutarch uses it of political revolt and it occurs in I Macc. strkjv@2:15 about Antiochus Epiphanes who was enforcing the apostasy from Judaism to Hellenism. In strkjv@Joshua:22:22| it occurs for rebellion against the Lord. It seems clear that the word here means a religious revolt and the use of the definite article (\h\) seems to mean that Paul had spoken to the Thessalonians about it. The only other New Testament use of the word is in strkjv@Acts:21:21| where it means apostasy from Moses. It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be {first} (\prton\) before Christ comes again. Note this adverb when only two events are compared (cf. strkjv@Acts:1:1|). {And the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition} (\kai apokaluphthi ho anthrpos ts anomias, ho huios ts apleias\). First aorist passive subjunctive after \ean m\ and same condition as with \elthi\. The use of this verb \apokalupt\, like \apokalupsin\ of the second coming in strkjv@1:7|, seems to note the superhuman character (Milligan) of the event and the same verb is repeated in verses 6,8|. The implication is that {the man of sin} is hidden somewhere who will be suddenly manifested just as false apostles pose as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:13ff.|), whether the crowning event of the apostasy or another name for the same event. Lightfoot notes the parallel between the man of sin, of whom sin is the special characteristic (genitive case, a Hebraism for the lawless one in verse 8|) and Christ. Both Christ and the adversary of Christ are revealed, there is mystery about each, both make divine claims (verse 4|). He seems to be the Antichrist of strkjv@1John:2:18|. The terrible phrase, the son of perdition, is applied to Judas in strkjv@John:17:12| (like Judas doomed to perdition), but here to the lawless one (\ho anomos\, verse 8|), who is not Satan, but some one definite person who is doing the work of Satan. Note the definite article each time.
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:4 @{He that opposeth and exalteth himself} (\ho antikeimenos kai huperairomenos\). Like John's Antichrist this one opposes (\anti-\) Christ and exalts himself (direct middle of \huperair\, old verb to lift oneself up {above} others, only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:12:7| in N.T.), but not Satan, but an agent of Satan. This participial clause is in apposition with the two preceding phrases, the man of sin, the son of perdition. Note strkjv@1Corinthians:8:5| about one called God and strkjv@Acts:17:23| for \sebasma\ (from \sebazomai\), object of worship, late word, in N.T. only in these two passages. {Songs:that he sitteth in the temple of God} (\hste auton eis ton naon tou theou kathisai\). Another example of the infinitive with \hste\ for result. Caius Caligula had made a desperate attempt to have his statue set up for worship in the Temple in Jerusalem. This incident may lie behind Paul's language here. {Setting himself forth as God} (\apodeiknunta heauton hoti estin theos\). Present active participle (\mi\ form) of \apodeiknumi\, agreeing in case with \auton\, {showing himself that he is God}. Caligula claimed to be God. Moffatt doubts if Paul is identifying this deception with the imperial cultus at this stage. Lightfoot thinks that the deification of the Roman emperor supplied Paul's language here. Wetstein notes a coin of Julius with \theos\ on one side and \Thessaloniken\ on the other. In strkjv@1John:2:18| we are told of "many antichrists" some of whom had already come. Hence it is not clear that Paul has in mind only one individual or even individuals at all rather than evil principles, for in verse 6| he speaks of \to katechon\ (that which restraineth) while in verse 7| it is \ho katechn\ (the one that restraineth). Frame argues for a combination of Belial and Antichrist as the explanation of Paul's language. But the whole subject is left by Paul in such a vague form that we can hardly hope to clear it up. It is possible that his own preaching while with them gave his readers a clue that we do not possess.
rwp@2Thessalonians:3:8 @{For nought} (\drean\). Adverbial accusative, as a gift, gift-wise (\drea\, gift, from \didmi\). Same claim made to the Corinthians (2Corinthians:11:7|), old word, in LXX, and papyri. He lodged with Jason, but did not receive his meals _gratis_, for he paid for them. Apparently he received no invitations to meals. Paul had to make his financial independence clear to avoid false charges which were made in spite of all his efforts. To eat bread is merely a Hebraism for eat (verse 10|). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| for labour and travail, and night and day (\nuktos kai hmeras\, genitive of time, by night and by day). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9| for rest of the verse in precisely the same words.
rwp@2Timothy:1:3 @{I thank} (\charin ech\). "I have gratitude." As in strkjv@1Timothy:1:12|. Robinson cites examples of this phrase from the papyri. It occurs also in strkjv@Luke:17:9; strkjv@Acts:2:47|. \Charis\ in doxologies Paul uses (1Corinthians:15:57; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@8:16; strkjv@9:15; strkjv@Romans:6:17; strkjv@7:25|). His usual idiom is \eucharist\ (1Corinthians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:1:8; strkjv@Philemon:1:4; strkjv@Phillipians:1:3|) or \eucharistoumen\ (1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Colossians:1:3|) or \ou pauomai eucharistn\ (Ephesians:1:16|) or \eucharistein opheilomen\ (2Thessalonians:1:3|). {Whom I serve from my forefathers} (\hi latreu apo progonn\). The relative \hi\ is the dative case with \latreu\ (see strkjv@Romans:1:9| for this verb), progressive present (I have been serving). For \progonn\ (forefathers) see strkjv@1Timothy:5:4|. Paul claims a pious ancestry as in strkjv@Acts:24:14; strkjv@Acts:26:5; strkjv@Galatians:2:14; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {In a pure conscience} (\en kathari suneidsei\). See strkjv@1Timothy:1:5; strkjv@Acts:23:1|. {Unceasing} (\adialeipton\). Late and rare compound, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:2| which see. The adverb \adialeipts\ is more frequent (in the papyri, literary _Koin_, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Romans:1:9|). The adjective here is the predicate accusative, "how I hold the memory concerning thee unceasing." The use of \adialeipts\ (adverb) is a sort of epistolary formula (papyri, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@5:17; strkjv@Romans:1:9|). {Remembrance} (\mneian\). Old word, in N.T. only Pauline (seven times, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Romans:1:9; strkjv@Phillipians:1:3|).
rwp@2Timothy:2:8 @{Risen from the dead} (\eggermenon ek nekrn\). Perfect passive participle of \egeir\, still risen as the perfect tense shows in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:4,12-20|. Predicate accusative. "Remember Jesus Christ as risen from the dead." This is the cardinal fact about Christ that proves his claim to be the Messiah, the Son of God. Christ is central for Paul here as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. {Of the seed of David} (\ek spermatos Daueid\). The humanity of Christ as in strkjv@Romans:1:3; strkjv@Phillipians:2:7f|. {According to my gospel} (\kata to euaggelion mou\). Paul's very phrase in strkjv@Romans:2:16; strkjv@16:25|. Not a written gospel, but my message. See also strkjv@1Corinthians:15:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:7; strkjv@Galatians:1:11; strkjv@2:2; strkjv@1Timothy:1:11|.
rwp@2Timothy:2:14 @{That they strive not about words} (\m logomachein\). Word apparently coined by Paul from \logomachia\ (1Timothy:6:4| which see), a back formation in that case. A mere war of words displeases Paul. (Titus:3:9|). {Useful} (\chrsimon\). Late and rare word from \chraomai\, here only in N.T. {To the subverting} (\epi katastrophi\). Old word (from \katastreph\, to turn down or over), here only in N.T. (except strkjv@2Peter:2:6| in some MSS., not in Westcott and Hort)." Because of the overthrow" (result \epi\, not aim), useless for this reason. Such war of words merely upsets the hearers.
rwp@2Timothy:4:17 @{But the Lord stood by me} (\ho de kurios moi parest\). Second aorist active of \paristmi\ (intransitive use), "took his stand by my side." See strkjv@Romans:16:2|. Clearly Jesus appeared to Paul now at this crisis and climax as he had done so many times before. {Strengthened me} (\enedunamsen me\). "Poured power into me." See strkjv@Phillipians:4:13|. {That through me the message might be fully proclaimed} (\hina di' emou to krugma plrophorthi\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \plrophore\ (see verse 5|). Either to the rulers in Rome now or, if the first imprisonment, by his release and going to Spain. {And that all the Gentiles might hear} (\kai akoussin panta ta ethn\). Continuation of the purpose with the aorist active subjunctive of \akou\. {I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion} (\erusthn ek stomatos leontos\). First aorist passive indicative of \ruomai\ (1Thessalonians:1:10|). A proverb, but not certain what the application is whether to Nero or to Satan (1Thessalonians:2:18|) or to the lion in the arena where Paul could not be sent because a Roman citizen.
rwp@Info_Acts @ SOURCES OF THE ACTS Beyond a doubt Luke employed a variety of sources for this great history as he did for the Gospel (Luke:1:1-4|). In fact, Cadbury argues that this Prologue was meant to apply to the Acts also as Volume II whether he intended to write a third volume or not. Certainly we are entitled to say that Luke used the same historical method for Acts. Some of these sources are easy to see. Luke had his own personal experience for the "we" sections. Then he had the benefit of Paul's own notes or suggestions for all that portion where Paul figures from chapters 8 to 28, since Luke was apparently with Paul in Rome when he finished the Book. This would include Paul's sermons and addresses which Luke gives unless one wishes to say, as some do, that Luke followed the style of Thucydides and composed the kind of addresses that he thought Paul would make. I see no evidence of that for each address differs from the others and suits precisely the occasion when it was delivered. The ancients frequently employed shorthand and Paul may have preserved notes of his addresses. Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University, argues in his _Composition and Date of Acts_ (1916) that Luke used an Aramaic document for the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. There is an Aramaic element in certain portions of these chapters, but nothing like so pronounced as in Luke 1 and 2 after strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. It cannot be said that Torrey has made out his case for such a single document. Luke may have had several such documents besides access to others familiar with the early days of the work in Jerusalem. There was Simon Peter whom Paul visited for two weeks in Jerusalem (Galatians:1:18|) besides other points of contact with him in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts:15| and strkjv@Galatians:2|). There was also Barnabas who was early Paul's friend (Acts:9:27|) and who knew the beginnings as few did (Acts:4:36f.|). Besides many others it is to be observed that Paul with Luke made a special visit to Caesarea where he spent a week with the gifted Philip and his daughters with the gift of prophecy (Acts:21:8f.|). But with all the inevitable variety of sources for the information needed to cover the wide field of the Book of Acts the same mind has manifestly worked through it and it is the same style all through that appears in the "we" sections where the writer is confessedly a companion of Paul. No other companion of Paul carries this claim for the authorship and no other was a physician and no author has the external evidence from early writers.
rwp@Acts:1:2 @{Until the day in which} (\achri hs hmeras\). Incorporation of the antecedent into the relative clause and the change of case \hi\ (locative) to \hs\ (genitive). {Was received up} (\anelmpth\). First aorist passive indicative of \analamban\. Common verb to lift anything up (Acts:10:16|) or person as Paul (Acts:20:13|). Several times of the Ascension of Jesus to heaven (Mark:16:19; strkjv@Acts:1:2,11,22; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16|) with or without "into heaven" (\eis ton ouranon\). This same verb is used of Elijah's translation to heaven in the LXX (2Kings:2:11|). The same idea, though not this word, is in strkjv@Luke:24:51|. See strkjv@Luke:9:51| for \analmpsis\ of the Ascension. {Had given commandment} (\enteilamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \entell\ (from \en\ and \tell\, to accomplish), usually in the middle, old verb, to enjoin. This special commandment refers directly to what we call the commission given the apostles before Christ ascended on high (John:20:21-23; strkjv@Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6; strkjv@Luke:24:44-49|). He had given commands to them when they were first chosen and when they were sent out on the tour of Galilee, but the immediate reference is as above. {Through the Holy Spirit} (\dia pneumatos hagiou\). In his human life Jesus was under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This applies to the choice of the apostles (Luke:6:13|) and to these special commands before the Ascension. {Whom he had chosen} (\hous exelexato\). Aorist middle indicative, not past perfect. The same verb (\eklexamenos\) was used by Luke in describing the choice of the twelve by Jesus (Luke:6:13|). But the aorist does not stand "for" our English pluperfect as Hackett says. That is explaining Greek by English. The Western text here adds: "And ordered to proclaim the gospel."
rwp@Acts:1:5 @{Baptized with water} (\ebaptisen hudati\) {and with the Holy Ghost} (\en pneumati baptisthsesthe hagii\). The margin has "in the Holy Ghost" (Spirit, it should be). The American Standard Version renders "in" both with "water" and "Holy Spirit" as do Goodspeed (American Translation) and Mrs. Montgomery (Centenary Translation). John's own words (Matthew:3:11|) to which Jesus apparently refers use \en\ (in) both with water and Spirit. There is a so-called instrumental use of \en\ where we in English have to say "with" (Revelation:13:10| \en machairi\, like \machairi\, strkjv@Acts:12:2|). That is to say \en\ with the locative presents the act as located in a certain instrument like a sword (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 589f.). But the instrumental case is more common without \en\ (the locative and instrumental cases having the same form). Songs:it is often a matter of indifference which idiom is used as in strkjv@John:21:8| we have \ti ploiarii\ (locative without \en\). They came {in} (locative case without \en\) the boat. Songs:in strkjv@John:1:31| \en hudati baptizn\ baptizing in water. No distinction therefore can be insisted on here between the construction \hudati\ and \en pneumati\ (both being in the locative case, one without, one with \en\). Note unusual position of the verb \baptisthsesthe\ (future passive indicative) between \pneumati\ and \hagii\. This baptism of the Holy Spirit was predicted by John (Matthew:3:11|) as the characteristic of the Messiah's work. Now the Messiah himself in his last message before his Ascension proclaims that in a few days the fulfilment of that prophecy will come to pass. The Codex Bezae adds here "which ye are about to receive" and "until the Pentecost" to verse 5|. {Not many days hence} (\ou meta pollas tautas hmeras\). A neat Greek idiom difficult to render smoothly into English: "Not after many days these." The litotes (not many=few) is common in Luke (Luke:7:6; strkjv@15:13; strkjv@Acts:17:27; strkjv@19:11; strkjv@20:12; strkjv@21:39; strkjv@28:14; strkjv@28:2|). The predicate use of \tautas\ (without article) is to be noted. "These" really means as a starting point, "from these" (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 702). It was ten days hence. This idiom occurs several times in Luke (Luke:24:21; strkjv@Acts:24:21|), as elsewhere (John:4:18; strkjv@2Peter:3:1|). In strkjv@Luke:2:12| the copula is easily supplied as it exists in strkjv@Luke:1:36; strkjv@2:2|.
rwp@Acts:2:38 @{Repent ye} (\metanosate\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative. Change your mind and your life. Turn right about and do it now. You _crucified_ this Jesus. Now _crown_ him in your hearts as Lord and Christ. This first. {And be baptized every one of you} (\kai baptistht hekastos hmn\). Rather, "And let each one of you be baptized." Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed "in the name of Jesus Christ" (\en ti onomati Isou Christou\). In accordance with the command of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| (\eis to onoma\). No distinction is to be insisted on between \eis to onoma\ and \en ti onomati\ with \baptiz\ since \eis\ and \en\ are really the same word in origin. In strkjv@Acts:10:48| \en ti onomati Isou Christou\ occurs, but \eis\ to \onoma\ in strkjv@8:16; strkjv@19:5|. The use of \onoma\ means in the name or with the authority of one as \eis onoma prophtou\ (Matthew:10:41|) as a prophet, in the name of a prophet. In the Acts the full name of the Trinity does not occur in baptism as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19|, but this does not show that it was not used. The name of Jesus Christ is the distinctive one in Christian baptism and really involves the Father and the Spirit. See on ¯Matthew:28:19| for discussion of this point. "Luke does not give the form of words used in baptism by the Apostles, but merely states the fact that they baptized those who acknowledged Jesus as Messiah or as Lord" (Page). {Unto the remission of your sins} (\eis aphesin tn hamartin hmn\). This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of \eis\ does exist as in strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7| \eis doxan hmn\ (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of \eis\ for aim or purpose. It is seen in strkjv@Matthew:10:41| in three examples \eis onoma prophtou, dikaiou, mathtou\ where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in strkjv@Matthew:12:41| about the preaching of Jonah (\eis to krugma Ina\). They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the _Koin_ generally (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. Songs:I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received. {The gift of the Holy Ghost} (\tn drean tou hagiou pneumatos\). The gift consists (Acts:8:17|) in the Holy Spirit (genitive of identification).
rwp@Acts:2:39 @{The promise} (\h epaggelia\). The promise made by Jesus (1:4|) and foretold by Joel (verse 18|). {To you} (\humin\). You Jews. To your descendants, sons and daughters of verse 17|. {To all that are afar off} (\psin tois eis makran\. The horizon widens and includes the Gentiles. Those "afar off" from the Jews were the heathen (Isaiah:49:1; strkjv@57:19; strkjv@Ephesians:2:13,17|). The rabbis so used it. {Shall call} (\an proskalestai\). First aorist middle subjunctive with \an\ in an indefinite relative clause, a perfectly regular construction. The Lord God calls men of every nation anywhere whether Jews or Gentiles. It may be doubted how clearly Peter grasped the significance of these words for he will have trouble over this very matter on the housetop in Joppa and in Caesarea, but he will see before long the full sweep of the great truth that he here proclaims under the impulse of the Holy Spirit. It was a great moment that Peter here reaches.
rwp@Acts:3:15 @{But the Prince of life ye killed} (\ton de archgon ts zs apekteinate\). "The magnificent antithesis" (Bengel) Peter here draws between their asking for a murderer and killing the Prince (or Author) of life. Peter pictures Jesus as the source of all life as is done in strkjv@John:1:1-18; strkjv@Colossians:1:14-20; strkjv@Hebrews:1:2f|. \Archgos\ (\arch\, beginning, \ag\, to lead) is an adjective "furnishing the first cause or occasion" in Euripides, Plato. Thence substantive, the originator, the leader, the pioneer as of Jesus both Beginner and Finisher (Hebrews:12:2|). See also strkjv@Hebrews:2:10; strkjv@Acts:5:31| where it is applied to Jesus as "Prince and Saviour." But God raised him from the dead in contrast to what they had done. {Whereof we are witnesses} (\hou hmeis martures esmen\). Of which fact (the resurrection) or of whom as risen, \hou\ having the same form in the genitive singular for masculine or neuter. Peter had boldly claimed that all the 120 have seen the Risen Christ. There is no denial of that claim.
rwp@Acts:7:1 @{Are these things so?} (\ei tauta houts echei\). On this use of \ei\ in a direct question see on ¯1:6|. Literally "Do these things hold thus?" A formal question by the high priest like our "Do you plead guilty, or not guilty?" (Furneaux). The abrupt question of the high priest would serve to break the evident spell of the angelic look on Stephen's face. Two charges had been made against Stephen (1) speaking against the holy temple, (2) changing the customs which Moses had delivered. Stephen could not give a yes or no answer to these two charges. There was an element of truth in each of them and a large amount of error all mixed together. Songs:he undertakes to explain his real position by the historical method, that is to say, by a rapid survey of God's dealing with the people of Israel and the Gentiles. It is the same method adopted by Paul in Pisidian Antioch (Acts:13:16ff.|) after he had become the successor of Stephen in his interpretation of the universal mission of Christianity. If one is disposed to say that Luke made up this speech to suit Stephen's predicament, he has to explain how the style is less Lukan than the narrative portions of Acts with knowledge of Jewish traditions that a Greek would not be likely to know. Precisely how Luke obtained the data for the speech we do not know, but Saul heard it and Philip, one of the seven, almost certainly. Both could have given Luke help about it. It is even possible that some one took notes of this important address. We are to remember also that the speech was interrupted at the end and may not include all that Stephen meant to say. But enough is given to give us a good idea of how Stephen met the first charge "by showing that the worship of God is not confined to Jerusalem or the Jewish temple" (Page). Then he answers the second charge by proving that God had many dealings with their fathers before Moses came and that Moses foretold the coming of the Messiah who is now known to be Jesus. It is at this point (verse 51|) that Stephen becomes passionate and so powerful that the wolves in the Sanhedrin lose all self-control. It is a great and masterful exposition of the worldwide mission of the gospel of Christ in full harmony with the Great Commission of Christ. The apostles had been so busy answering the Sadducees concerning the Resurrection of Christ and maintaining their freedom to teach and preach that they had not pushed the world-wide propaganda of the gospel as Jesus had commanded after they had received the Promise of the Father. But Stephen had proclaimed the same message of Christ and was now facing the same fate. Peter's mind had been enlightened by the Holy Spirit so that he could rightly interpret Joel and David in the light of Pentecost. "Songs:Stephen read the history of the Old Testament with new eyes in the light of the life and death of Jesus" (Furneaux).
rwp@Acts:8:5 @{Philip} (\Philippos\). The deacon (6:5|) and evangelist (21:8|), not the apostle of the same name (Mark:3:18|). {To the city of Samaria} (\eis tn polin ts Samarias\). Genitive of apposition. Samaria is the name of the city here. This is the first instance cited of the expansion noted in verse 4|. Jesus had an early and fruitful ministry in Samaria (John:4|), though the twelve were forbidden to go into a Samaritan city during the third tour of Galilee (Matthew:10:5|), a temporary prohibition withdrawn before Jesus ascended on high (Acts:1:8|). {Proclaimed} (\ekrussen\). Imperfect active, began to preach and kept on at it. Note \euaggelizomenoi\ in verse 4| of missionaries of good news (Page) while \ekrussen\ here presents the preacher as a herald. He is also a teacher (\didaskalos\) like Jesus. Luke probably obtained valuable information from Philip and his daughters about these early days when in his home in Caesarea (Acts:21:8|).
rwp@Acts:8:10 @{That power of God which is called Great} (\h Dunamis tou theou h kaloumen Megal\). Apparently here already the oriental doctrine of emanations or aeons so rampant in the second century. This "power" was considered a spark of God himself and Jerome (in strkjv@Matthew:24|) quotes Simon (Page) as saying: _Ego sum sermo Dei,... ego omnipotens, ego omnia Dei_. Simon claimed to _impersonate God_.
rwp@Acts:8:31 @{How can I, except some one shall guide me?} (\Ps gar an dunaimn ean me tis hodgsei me?\). This is a mixed condition, the conclusion coming first belongs to the fourth class (undetermined with less likelihood of being determined) with \an\ and the optative, but the condition (\ean\, instead of the usual \ei\, and the future indicative) is of the first class (determined or fulfilled. Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1022), a common enough phenomenon in the _Koin_. The eunuch felt the need of some one to guide (\hodge\ from \hodgos\, guide, and that from \hodos\, way, and \hegeomai\, to lead).
rwp@Acts:9:20 @{He proclaimed Jesus} (\ekrussen ton Isoun\). Imperfect indicative, inchoative, began to preach. Jesus, not Christ, is the correct text here. He did this first preaching in the Jewish synagogues, a habit of his life when possible, and following the example of Jesus. {That he is the Son of God} (\hoti houtos estin ho huios tou theou\). This is Paul's platform as a Christian preacher, one that he always occupied to the very end. It was a complete reversal of his previous position. Jesus had turned him completely around. It is the conclusion that Saul now drew from the vision of the Risen Christ and the message through Ananias. By "the Son of God" Saul means the Messiah of promise and hope, the Messianic sense of the Baptist (John:1:34|) and of Nathanael (John:1:49|) for Saul is now proclaiming his faith in Jesus in the very synagogues where he had meant to arrest those who professed their faith in him. Peter laid emphasis on the Resurrection of Jesus as a glorious fact and proclaimed Jesus as Lord and Christ. Paul boldly calls Jesus the Son of God with full acknowledgment of his deity from the very start. Thomas had come to this place slowly (John:20:28|). Saul begins with this truth and never leaves it. With this faith he can shake the world. There is no power in any other preaching.
rwp@Acts:9:23 @{When many days were fulfilled} (\Hs eplrounto hmerai hikanai\). Imperfect passive indicative of \plro\, old and common verb, were in process of being fulfilled. How "many" (considerable, \hikanai\, common word for a long period) Luke does not say nor does he say that Saul spent all of this period in Damascus, as we know from strkjv@Galatians:1:16-18| was not the case. Paul there states definitely that he went away from Damascus to Arabia and returned there before going back to Jerusalem and that the whole period was about "three years" which need not mean three full years, but at least portions of three. Most of the three years was probably spent in Arabia because of the two explosions in Damascus (before his departure and on his return) and because he was unknown in Jerusalem as a Christian on his arrival there. It cannot be argued from the frequent lacunae in the Acts that Luke tells all that was true or that he knew. He had his own methods and aims as every historian has. We are at perfect liberty to supplement the narrative in the Acts with items from Paul's Epistles. Songs:we must assume the return of Saul from Arabia at this juncture, between verses 22,23|, when Saul resumed his preaching in the Jewish synagogues with renewed energy and grasp after the period of mature reflection and readjustment in Arabia. {Took counsel together} (\sunebouleusanto\). First aorist (effective) middle indicative of \sunbouleu\, old and common verb for counselling (\bouleu\) together (\sun\). Things had reached a climax. It was worse than before he left for Arabia. Paul was now seeing the fulfilment of the prophecy of Jesus about him (9:16|). {To kill him} (\anelein auton\). Second aorist (effective) active infinitive of \anaire\, to take up, to make away with, to kill (Luke:23:32; strkjv@Acts:12:1|, etc.). The infinitive expresses purpose here as is done in verse 24| by \hops\ and the aorist active subjunctive of the same verb (\anelsin\). Saul now knew what Stephen had suffered at his hands as his own life was in peril in the Jewish quarter of Damascus. It was a picture of his old self. He may even have been scourged here (2Corinthians:11:24|).
rwp@Acts:10:39 @{And we are witnesses} (\kai hmeis martures\). Compare "ye yourselves know" (verse 37|). Peter thus appeals to what the audience know and to what the disciples know. He made the same claim about personal witnesses of the Resurrection of Jesus at Pentecost (2:32|). Here Peter affirms full knowledge of the work of Jesus in Judea (for whole country including Galilee and Perea) and Jerusalem (given mainly in John's Gospel). In the Greek \hn\ (which) is attracted into the genitive case to agree with the antecedent \pantn\ (all), a common enough idiom. {Whom also they slew} (\hon kai aneilan\). Second aorist active indicative of \anaire\ with \a\ as often in Acts (2:23; strkjv@5:30|). But note \kai\ (also) in the old MSS., not in the Textus Receptus. They "also" slew him, went that far, "this crowning atrocity" (Vincent), \kai\ could here be "even." {Hanging him on a tree} (\kremasantes epi xulou\). This same expression used by Peter in strkjv@5:30| which see for discussion.
rwp@Acts:10:42 @{He charged} (\parggeilen\). First aorist active indicative as in strkjv@1:4|. There Jesus is the subject and so probably here, though Page insists that \ho theos\ (God) is here because of verse 40|. {To testify} (\diamarturasthai\). First aorist middle infinitive. See on ¯2:40|. {Ordained} (\hrismenos\). Perfect passive participle of \horiz\, old verb, to mark out, to limit, to make a horizon. {Judge} (\krits\). The same point made by Peter in strkjv@1Peter:4:5|. He does not use the word "Messiah" to these Gentiles though he did say "anointed" (\echrisen\) in verse 38|. Peter's claim for Jesus is that he is the Judge of Jew and Gentile (living and dead).
rwp@Acts:13:5 @{Proclaimed} (\katggellon\). Imperfect active of \kataggell\, inchoative, began to proclaim. This was Paul's rule of procedure, "to the Jew first" (Romans:1:16; strkjv@Acts:13:46; strkjv@17:2; strkjv@18:4,19; strkjv@19:8|). {They had also} (\eichon de kai\). Imperfect active, descriptive. {As their attendant} (\hupretn\). Literally, "under-rower" (\hupo, rets\) in the trireme. Probably here minister (\chazzan\) or assistant in the synagogue as in strkjv@Luke:4:20|. Cf. strkjv@Matthew:5:25|. It is not clear what John Mark did, though he was evidently selected by Barnabas as his cousin. He may have helped in the baptizing. There were probably others also in the company (verse 13|). The "also" may mean that Mark did some preaching. Barnabas was probably the leader in the work in these Jewish synagogues.
rwp@Acts:13:16 @{Paul stood up} (\anastas Paulos\). The Jewish custom was to sit while speaking (Luke:4:20|), but the Greek and Roman was to stand (Acts:17:22|). It is possible as Lewin (_Life of St. Paul_, Vol. 1, p. 141) suggests that here Paul stepped upon the platform and then took his seat as he began to speak or he may have followed the Greek and Roman custom. Paul is the leader now and the more gifted speaker (Acts:14:12|), so that he responds to the courteous invitation of the rulers. {Beckoning} (\kataseisas\). First aorist active participle of \katasei\, old verb to shake down, a dramatic gesture for quiet and order like Peter in strkjv@12:17| and Paul on the steps of the tower of Antonia (21:40|). {And ye that fear God} (\kai hoi phoboumenoi ton theon\). Evidently large numbers of these Gentiles like Cornelius in Caesarea were present. They offered Paul a great opportunity for reaching the purely pagan Gentiles. This (verses 16-41|) is the first full report of a sermon of Paul's that Luke has preserved for us. He is now a practised preacher of the gospel that he began proclaiming at Damascus, that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah of promise and the Saviour of the whole world both Jew and Gentile if they will only believe on him and be saved. It is possible that Paul here based his sermon on the passages of the law and the prophets that had just been read. He uses two words from the LXX, one in verse 19| from strkjv@Deuteronomy:1:31| \etrophophorsen\ (as a nursing-father bare he them), the reading of many old MSS. and the one preferred by the American Committee, the other in verse 17| from strkjv@Isaiah:1:2| \hupssen\ (exalted). At any rate it is clear that Paul spoke in Greek so that all could understand his sermon. He may have written out notes of this sermon afterwards for Luke. The keynotes of Paul's theology as found in his Epistles appear in this sermon. It is interesting to observe the steady growth of Paul's Christology as he faced the great problems of his day. Here we see Paul's gospel for the Jews and the God-fearers (Gentiles friendly to the Jews).
rwp@Acts:13:25 @{As John was fulfilling his course} (\hs eplrou Ians ton dromon\). Imperfect active of \plro\, describing his vivid ministry without defining the precise period when John asked the question. Paul uses this word \dromos\ (course) of his own race (Acts:20:24; strkjv@2Timothy:4:7|). {What suppose ye that I am?} (\Ti eme huponoeite einai?\) Note \ti\ (neuter), not \tina\ (masculine), {what} not {who}, character, not identity. It is indirect discourse (the infinitive \einai\ and the accusative of general reference). {Huponoe} (\hupo, noe\) is to think secretly, to suspect, to conjecture. {I am not he} (\ouk eimi eg\). These precise words are not given in the Gospels, but the idea is the same as the disclaimers by the Baptist in strkjv@John:1:19-27| (cf. also strkjv@Matthew:3:11; strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16|). Paul had a true grasp of the message of the Baptist. He uses the very form \lsai\ (first aorist active infinitive of \lu\) found in strkjv@Mark:1:7; strkjv@Luke:3:16| and the word for shoes (\hupodma\, singular) in all three. His quotation is remarkably true to the words in the Synoptic Gospels. How did Paul get hold of the words of the Baptist so clearly?
rwp@Acts:13:38 @{Through this man} (\dia toutou\). This very man whom the Jews had crucified and whom God had raised from the dead. Remission of sins (\aphesis hamartin\) is proclaimed (\kataggelletai\) to you. This is the keynote of Paul's message as it had been that of Peter at Pentecost (2:38; strkjv@5:31; strkjv@10:43|). Cf. strkjv@26:18|. This glorious message Paul now presses home in his exhortation.
rwp@Acts:13:48 @{As the Gentiles heard this they were glad} (\akouonta ta ethn echairon\). Present active participle of \akou\ and imperfect active of \chair\, linear action descriptive of the joy of the Gentiles. {Glorified the word of God} (\edoxazon ton logon tou theou\). Imperfect active again. The joy of the Gentiles increased the fury of the Jews. "The synagogue became a scene of excitement which must have been something like the original speaking with tongues" (Rackham). The joy of the Gentiles was to see how they could receive the higher blessing of Judaism without circumcision and other repellent features of Jewish ceremonialism. It was the gospel of grace and liberty from legalism that Paul had proclaimed. Whether strkjv@Galatians:4:13| describes this incident or not (the South Galatian theory), it illustrates it when Gentiles received Paul as if he were Christ Jesus himself. It was triumph with the Gentiles, but defeat with the Jews. {As many as were ordained to eternal life} (\hosoi san tetagmenoi eis zn ainion\). Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative of \tass\, a military term to place in orderly arrangement. The word "ordain" is not the best translation here. "Appointed," as Hackett shows, is better. The Jews here had voluntarily rejected the word of God. On the other side were those Gentiles who gladly accepted what the Jews had rejected, not all the Gentiles. Why these Gentiles here ranged themselves on God's side as opposed to the Jews Luke does not tell us. This verse does not solve the vexed problem of divine sovereignty and human free agency. There is no evidence that Luke had in mind an _absolutum decretum_ of personal salvation. Paul had shown that God's plan extended to and included Gentiles. Certainly the Spirit of God does move upon the human heart to which some respond, as here, while others push him away. {Believed} (\episteusan\). Summary or constative first aorist active indicative of \pisteu\. The subject of this verb is the relative clause. By no manner of legerdemain can it be made to mean "those who believe were appointed." It was saving faith that was exercised only by those who were appointed unto eternal life, who were ranged on the side of eternal life, who were thus revealed as the subjects of God's grace by the stand that they took on this day for the Lord. It was a great day for the kingdom of God.
rwp@Acts:14:4 @{But the multitude of the city was divided} (\eschisth de to plthos ts poles\). First aorist passive indicative of \schiz\, old verb to split, to make a schism or factions as Sadducees and Pharisees (23:7|). This division was within the Gentile populace. Part held (\hoi men san\), literally "some were with the Jews" (\sun tois Ioudaiois\), part with the apostles (\hoi de sun tois apostolois\). Common demonstrative of contrast (\hoi men, hoi de\, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 694). The Jewish leaders made some impression on the Gentiles as at Antioch in Pisidia and later at Thessalonica (17:4f.|). This is the first time in the Acts that Paul and Barnabas are termed "apostles" (see also verse 14|). Elsewhere in the Acts the word is restricted to the twelve. Certainly Luke does not here employ it in that technical sense. To have followed Jesus in his ministry and to have seen the Risen Christ was essential to the technical use (1:22f.|). Whether Barnabas had seen the Risen Christ we do not know, but certainly Paul had (1Corinthians:9:1f.; strkjv@15:8|). Paul claimed to be an apostle on a par with the twelve (Galatians:1:1,16-18|). The word originally means simply one sent (John:13:16|) like messengers of the churches with the collection (2Corinthians:8:23|). The Jews used it of those sent from Jerusalem to collect the temple tribute. Paul applies the word to James the Lord's brother (Galatians:1:19|), to Epaphroditus (Phillipians:2:25|) as the messenger of the church in Philippi, to Silvanus and Timothy (1Thessalonians:2:6; strkjv@Acts:18:5|), apparently to Apollos (1Corinthians:4:9|), and to Andronicus and Junias (Romans:16:6f.|). He even calls the Judaizers "false apostles" (2Corinthians:11:13|).
rwp@Acts:14:15 @{Sirs} (\andres\). Literally, Men. Abrupt, but courteous. {We also are men of like passions with you} (\kai hmeis homoiopatheis esmen humin anthrpoi\). Old adjective from \homoios\ (like) and \pasch\, to experience. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@James:5:17|. It means "of like nature" more exactly and affected by like sensations, not "gods" at all. Their conduct was more serious than the obeisance of Cornelius to Peter (10:25f.|). \Humin\ is associative instrumental case. {And bring you good tidings} (\euaggelizomenoi\). No "and" in the Greek, just the present middle participle, "gospelizing you." They are not gods, but evangelists. Here we have Paul's message to a pagan audience without the Jewish environment and he makes the same line of argument seen in strkjv@Acts:17:21-32; strkjv@Romans:1:18-23|. At Antioch in Pisidia we saw Paul's line of approach to Jews and proselytes (Acts:13:16-41|). {That ye should turn from these vain things} (\apo toutn tn matain epistrephein\). He boldly calls the worship of Jupiter and Mercury and all idols "vain" or empty things, pointing to the statues and the temple. {Unto the living God} (\epi theon znta\). They must go the whole way. Our God is a live God, not a dead statue. Paul is fond of this phrase (2Corinthians:6:16; strkjv@Romans:9:26|). {Who made} (\hos epoisen\). The one God is alive and is the Creator of the Universe just as Paul will argue in Athens (Acts:17:24|). Paul here quotes strkjv@Psalms:146:6| and has strkjv@Genesis:1:1| in mind. See also strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9| where a new allegiance is also claimed as here.
rwp@Acts:14:17 @{And yet} (\kaitoi\). Old Greek compound particle (\kai toi\). In the N.T. twice only, once with finite verb as here, once with the participle (Hebrews:4:3|). {Without witness} (\amarturon\). Old adjective (\a\ privative and \martus\, witness), only here in the N.T. {Left} (\aphken\). First aorist active (\k\ aorist indicative of \aphimi\). {In that he did good} (\agathourgn\). Present active causal participle of \agathourge\, late and rare verb (also \agathoerge\ strkjv@1Timothy:6:18|), reading of the oldest MSS. here for \agathopoie\, to do good. Note two other causal participles here parallel with \agathourgn\, viz., \didous\ ("giving you") present active of \didmi, empipln\ ("filling") present active of \empimpla\ (late form of \empimplmi\). This witness to God (his doing good, giving rains and fruitful seasons, filling your hearts with food and gladness) they could receive without the help of the Old Testament revelation (Romans:1:20|). Zeus was regarded as the god of rain (Jupiter Pluvius) and Paul claims the rain and the fruitful (\karpophorous, karpos\, and \pher\, fruit bearing, old word, here alone in N.T.) seasons as coming from God. Lycaonia was often dry and it would be an appropriate item. "Mercury, as the God of merchandise, was also the dispenser of food" (Vincent). Paul does not talk about laws of nature as if they governed themselves, but he sees the living God "behind the drama of the physical world" (Furneaux). These simple country people could grasp his ideas as he claims everything for the one true God. {Gladness} (\euphrosuns\). Old word from \euphrn\ (\eu\ and \phrn\), good cheer. In the N.T. only strkjv@Acts:2:28| and here. Cheerfulness should be our normal attitude when we consider God's goodness. Paul does not here mention Christ because he had the single definite purpose to dissuade them from worshipping Barnabas and himself.
rwp@Acts:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo ts Ioudaias\). Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (11:2|) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (13:13|) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18|) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord's doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Acts:15:24|). In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty." It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts strkjv@15:5-29| in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in strkjv@11:29f|. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in strkjv@11:29f.|, but only "the elders." In strkjv@Acts:15| Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In strkjv@Galatians:2:2| by the use of "them" (\autois\) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses strkjv@15:5-6|. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18|), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew:15:24ff.|). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. Songs:one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest. {Taught the brethren} (\edidaskon tous adelphous\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (11:20-26|), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis. {Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved} (\ean me peritmthte ti ethei Muses, ou dunasthe sthnai\). There was the dictum of the Judaizers to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had been circumcised. This is probably the precise language employed, for they spoke in Greek to these Greeks. It is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, \ean\ plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peritemn\). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (\ti ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\sthnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.
rwp@Acts:15:14 @{Hearken unto me} (\akousate mou\). Usual appeal for attention. James was termed James the Just and was considered a representative of the Hebraic as opposed to the Hellenistic wing of the Jewish Christians (Acts:6:1|). The Judaizers had doubtless counted on him as a champion of their view and did later wrongfully make use of his name against Peter at Antioch (Galatians:2:12|). There was instant attention when James began to speak. {Symeon} (\Sumen\). The Aramaic form of Simon as in strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. This little touch would show his affinities with the Jewish Christians (not the Judaizers). This Aramaic form is used also in strkjv@Luke:2:25,34| of the old prophet in the temple. Possibly both forms (Symeon, Aramaic, and Simon, Greek) were current in Jerusalem. {How} (\kaths\). Strictly, "according as," here like \hos\ in indirect discourse somewhat like the epexegetic or explanatory use in strkjv@3John:1:3|. {First} (\prton\). Told by Peter in verse 7|. James notes, as Peter did, that this experience of Barnabas and Paul is not the beginning of work among the Gentiles. {Did visit} (\epeskepsato\). First aorist middle indicative of \episkeptomai\, old verb to look upon, to look after, provide for. This same verb occurs in strkjv@James:1:27| and is one of various points of similarity between this speech of James in Acts and the Epistle of James as shown by Mayor in his _Commentary on James_. Somehow Luke may have obtained notes of these various addresses. {To take from the Gentiles a people for his name} (\labein ex ethnn laon ti onomati autou\). Bengel calls this _egregium paradoxon_, a chosen people (\laon\) out of the Gentiles (\ethnn\). This is what is really involved in what took place at Caesarea at the hands of Peter and the campaign of Barnabas and Paul from Antioch. But such a claim of God's purpose called for proof from Scripture to convince Jews and this is precisely what James undertakes to give. This new Israel from among the Gentiles is one of Paul's great doctrines as set forth in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|. Note the use of God's "name" here for "the Israel of God" (Galatians:6:16|).
rwp@Acts:17:18 @{And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him} (\tines de kai tn Epikourin kai Stikn philosophn suneballon auti\). Imperfect active of \sunball\, old verb, in the N.T. only by Luke, to bring or put together in one's mind (Luke:2:19|), to meet together (Acts:20:14|), to bring together aid (18:27|), to confer or converse or dispute as here and already strkjv@4:15| which see. These professional philosophers were always ready for an argument and so they frequented the agora for that purpose. Luke uses one article and so groups the two sects together in their attitude toward Paul, but they were very different in fact. Both sects were eager for argument and both had disdain for Paul, but they were the two rival practical philosophies of the day, succeeding the more abstruse theories of Plato and Aristotle. Socrates had turned men's thought inward (\Gnthi Seauton\, Know Thyself) away from the mere study of physics. Plato followed with a profound development of the inner self (metaphysics). Aristotle with his cyclopaedic grasp sought to unify and relate both physics and metaphysics. Both Zeno and Epicurus (340-272 B.C.) took a more practical turn in all this intellectual turmoil and raised the issues of everyday life. Zeno (360-260 B.C.) taught in the \Stoa\ (Porch) and so his teaching was called Stoicism. He advanced many noble ideas that found their chief illustration in the Roman philosophers (Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius). He taught self-mastery and hardness with an austerity that ministered to pride or suicide in case of failure, a distinctly selfish and unloving view of life and with a pantheistic philosophy. Epicurus considered practical atheism the true view of the universe and denied a future life and claimed pleasure as the chief thing to be gotten out of life. He did not deny the existence of gods, but regarded them as unconcerned with the life of men. The Stoics called Epicurus an atheist. Lucretius and Horace give the Epicurean view of life in their great poems. This low view of life led to sensualism and does today, for both Stoicism and Epicureanism are widely influential with people now. "Eat and drink for tomorrow we die," they preached. Paul had doubtless become acquainted with both of these philosophies for they were widely prevalent over the world. Here he confronts them in their very home. He is challenged by past-masters in the art of appealing to the senses, men as skilled in their dialectic as the Pharisaic rabbis with whom Paul had been trained and whose subtleties he had learned how to expose. But, so far as we know, this is a new experience for Paul to have a public dispute with these philosophical experts who had a natural contempt for all Jews and for rabbis in particular, though they found Paul a new type at any rate and so with some interest in him. "In Epicureanism, it was man's sensual nature which arrayed itself against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism it was his self-righteousness and pride of intellect" (Hackett). Knowling calls the Stoic the Pharisee of philosophy and the Epicurean the Sadducee of philosophy. Socrates in this very agora used to try to interest the passers-by in some desire for better things. That was 450 years before Paul is challenged by these superficial sophistical Epicureans and Stoics. It is doubtful if Paul had ever met a more difficult situation. {What would this babbler say?} (\Ti an theloi ho spermologos houtos legein?\). The word for "babbler" means "seed-picker" or picker up of seeds (\sperma\, seed, \leg\, to collect) like a bird in the agora hopping about after chance seeds. Plutarch applies the word to crows that pick up grain in the fields. Demosthenes called Aeschines a \spermologos\. Eustathius uses it of a man hanging around in the markets picking up scraps of food that fell from the carts and so also of mere rhetoricians and plagiarists who picked up scraps of wisdom from others. Ramsay considers it here a piece of Athenian slang used to describe the picture of Paul seen by these philosophers who use it, for not all of them had it ("some," \tines\). Note the use of \an\ and the present active optative \theloi\, conclusion of a fourth-class condition in a rhetorical question (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). It means, What would this picker up of seeds wish to say, if he should get off an idea? It is a contemptuous tone of supreme ridicule and doubtless Paul heard this comment. Probably the Epicureans made this sneer that Paul was a charlatan or quack. {Other some} (\hoi de\). But others, in contrast with the "some" just before. Perhaps the Stoics take this more serious view of Paul. {He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods} (\zenn daimonin dokei kataggeleus einai\). This view is put cautiously by \dokei\ (seems). \Kataggeleus\ does not occur in the old Greek, though in ecclesiastical writers, but Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 99) gives an example of the word "on a marble stele recording a decree of the Mitylenaens in honour of the Emperor Augustus," where it is the herald of the games. Here alone in the N.T. \Daimonion\ is used in the old Greek sense of deity or divinity whether good or bad, not in the N.T. sense of demons. Both this word and \kataggeleus\ are used from the Athenian standpoint. \Xenos\ is an old word for a guest-friend (Latin _hospes_) and then host (Romans:16:23|), then for foreigner or stranger (Matthew:25:31; strkjv@Acts:17:21|), new and so strange as here and strkjv@Hebrews:13:9; strkjv@1Peter:4:12|, and then aliens (Ephesians:2:12|). This view of Paul is the first count against Socrates: Socrates does wrong, introducing new deities (\adikei Skrats, kaina daimonia eisphern\, Xen. _Mem_. I). On this charge the Athenians voted the hemlock for their greatest citizen. What will they do to Paul? This Athens was more sceptical and more tolerant than the old Athens. But Roman law did not allow the introduction of a new religion (_religio illicita_). Paul was walking on thin ice though he was the real master philosopher and these Epicureans and Stoics were quacks. Paul had the only true philosophy of the universe and life with Jesus Christ as the centre (Colossians:1:12-20|), the greatest of all philosophers as Ramsay justly terms him. But these men are mocking him. {Because he preached Jesus and the resurrection} (\hoti ton Isoun kai tn anastasin euggelizato\). Reason for the view just stated. Imperfect middle indicative of \euaggeliz\, to "gospelize." Apparently these critics considered \anastasis\ (Resurrection) another deity on a par with Jesus. The Athenians worshipped all sorts of abstract truths and virtues and they misunderstood Paul on this subject. They will leave him as soon as he mentions the resurrection (verse 32|). It is objected that Luke would not use the word in this sense here for his readers would not under stand him. But Luke is describing the misapprehension of this group of philosophers and this interpretation fits in precisely.
rwp@Acts:17:22 @{Stood in the midst of the Areopagus} (\statheis en mesi tou Areiou Pagou\). First aorist passive of \histmi\ used of Peter in strkjv@2:14|. Majestic figure whether on Mars Hill or in the Stoa Basilica before the Areopagus Court. There would be a crowd of spectators and philosophers in either case and Paul seized the opportunity to preach Christ to this strange audience as he did in Caesarea before Herod Agrippa and the crowd of prominent people gathered by Festus for the entertainment. Paul does not speak as a man on trial, but as one trying to get a hearing for the gospel of Christ. {Somewhat superstitious} (\hs deisidaimonesterous\). The Authorized Version has "too superstitious," the American Standard "very religious." \Deisidaimn\ is a neutral word (from \deid\, to fear, and \daimn\, deity). The Greeks used it either in the good sense of pious or religious or the bad sense of superstitious. Thayer suggests that Paul uses it "with kindly ambiguity." Page thinks that Luke uses the word to represent the religious feeling of the Athenians (_religiosus_) which bordered on superstition. The Vulgate has _superstitiosiores_. In strkjv@25:19| Festus uses the term \deisidaimonia\ for "religion." It seems unlikely that Paul should give this audience a slap in the face at the very start. The way one takes this adjective here colours Paul's whole speech before the Council of Areopagus. The comparative here as in verse 21| means more religions than usual (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 664f.), the object of the comparison not being expressed. The Athenians had a tremendous reputation for their devotion to religion, "full of idols" (verse 16|).
rwp@Acts:17:23 @{For} (\gar\). Paul gives an illustration of their religiousness from his own experiences in their city. {The objects of your worship} (\ta sebasmata humn\). Late word from \sebazomai\, to worship. In N T. only here and strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:4|. The use of this word for temples, altars, statues, shows the conciliatory tone in the use of \deisidaimonesterous\ in verse 22|. {An altar} (\bmon\). Old word, only here in the N.T. and the only mention of a heathen altar in the N.T {With this inscription} (\en hi epegegrapto\). On which had been written (stood written), past perfect passive indicative of \epigraph\, old and common verb for writing on inscriptions (\epigraph\, strkjv@Luke:23:38|). {To an Unknown God} (\AGNOSTO THEO\). Dative case, dedicated to. Pausanias (I. 1, 4) says that in Athens there are "altars to gods unknown" (\bmoi then agnstn\). Epimenides in a pestilence advised the sacrifice of a sheep to the befitting god whoever he might be. If an altar was dedicated to the wrong deity, the Athenians feared the anger of the other gods. The only use in the N.T. of \agnstos\, old and common adjective (from \a\ privative and \gnstos\ verbal of \ginsk\, to know). Our word agnostic comes from it. Here it has an ambiguous meaning, but Paul uses it though to a stern Christian philosopher it may be the "confession at once of a bastard philosophy and of a bastard religion" (Hort, _Hulsean Lectures_, p. 64). Paul was quick to use this confession on the part of the Athenians of a higher power than yet known to them. Songs:he gets his theme from this evidence of a deeper religious sense in them and makes a most clever use of it with consummate skill. {In ignorance} (\agnoountes\). Present active participle of \agnoe\, old verb from same root as \agnstos\ to which Paul refers by using it. {This set I forth unto you} (\touto ego kataggell humin\). He is a \kataggeleus\ (verse 18|) as they suspected of a God, both old and new, old in that they already worship him, new in that Paul knows who he is. By this master stroke he has brushed to one side any notion of violation of Roman law or suspicion of heresy and claims their endorsement of his new gospel, a shrewd and consummate turn. He has their attention now and proceeds to describe this God left out of their list as the one true and Supreme God. The later MSS. here read \hon--touton\ (whom--this one) rather than \ho--touto\ (what--this), but the late text is plainly an effort to introduce too soon the personal nature of God which comes out clearly in verse 24|.
rwp@Acts:17:26 @{And he made of one} (\epoisen te ex henos\). The word \haimatos\ (blood) is absent from Aleph A B and is a later explanatory addition. What Paul affirms is the unity of the human race with a common origin and with God as the Creator. This view runs counter to Greek exclusiveness which treated other races as barbarians and to Jewish pride which treated other nations as heathen or pagan (the Jews were \laos\, the Gentiles \ethn\). The cosmopolitanism of Paul here rises above Jew and Greek and claims the one God as the Creator of the one race of men. The Athenians themselves claimed to be \antochthonous\ (indigenous) and a special creation. Zeno and Seneca did teach a kind of cosmopolitanism (really pantheism) far different from the personal God of Paul. It was Rome, not Greece, that carried out the moral ideas of Zeno. Man is part of the universe (verse 24|) and God created (\epoisen\) man as he created (\poisas\) the all. {For to dwell} (\katoikein\). Infinitive (present active) of purpose, so as to dwell. {Having determined} (\horisas\). First aorist active participle of \horiz\, old verb to make a horizon as already in strkjv@19:42| which see. Paul here touches God's Providence. God has revealed himself in history as in creation. His hand appears in the history of all men as well as in that of the Chosen People of Israel. {Appointed seasons} (\prostetagmenous kairous\). Not the weather as in strkjv@14:17|, but "the times of the Gentiles" (\kairoi ethnn\) of which Jesus spoke (Luke:21:24|). The perfect passive participle of \prostass\, old verb to enjoin, emphasizes God's control of human history without any denial of human free agency as was involved in the Stoic Fate (\Heirmarmen\). {Bounds} (\horothesias\). Limits? Same idea in strkjv@Job:12:23|. Nations rise and fall, but it is not blind chance or hard fate. Thus there is an interplay between God's will and man's activities, difficult as it is for us to see with our shortened vision.
rwp@Acts:17:27 @{That they should seek God} (\Ztein ton theon\). Infinitive (present active) of purpose again. Seek him, not turn away from him as the nations had done (Romans:1:18-32|). {If haply they might feel after him} (\ei ara ge pslaphseian auton\). First aorist active (Aeolic form) optative of \pslapha\, old verb from \psa\, to touch. Songs:used by the Risen Jesus in his challenge to the disciples (Luke:24:39|), by the Apostle John of his personal contact with Jesus (1John:1:1|), of the contact with Mount Sinai (Hebrews:12:18|). Here it pictures the blind groping of the darkened heathen mind after God to "find him" (\heuroien\, second aorist active optative) whom they had lost. One knows what it is in a darkened room to feel along the walls for the door (Deuteronomy:28:29; strkjv@Job:5:14; strkjv@12:25; strkjv@Isaiah:59:10|). Helen Keller, when told of God, said that she knew of him already, groping in the dark after him. The optative here with \ei\ is due to the condition of the fourth class (undetermined, but with vague hope of being determined) with aim also present (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). Note also \ara ge\ the inferential particle \ara\ with the delicate intensive particle \ge\. {Though he is not far from each one of us} (\kai ge ou makran apo henos hekastou hmn huparchonta\). More exactly with B L (\kai ge\ instead of \kaitoi\ or \kaitoi ge\), "and yet being not far from each one of us," a direct statement rather than a concessive one. The participle \huparchonta\ agrees with \auton\ and the negative \ou\ rather than the usual \me\ with the participle makes an emphatic negative. Note also the intensive particle \ge\.
rwp@Acts:17:28 @{For in him} (\en auti gar\). Proof of God's nearness, not stoic pantheism, but real immanence in God as God dwells in us. The three verbs (\zmen, kinoumetha, esmen\) form an ascending scale and reach a climax in God (life, movement, existence). \Kinoumetha\ is either direct middle present indicative (we move ourselves) or passive (we are moved). {As certain even of your own poets} (\hs kai tines tn kath' hums poitn\). "As also some of the poets among you." Aratus of Soli in Cilicia (ab. B.C. 270) has these very words in his _Ta Phainomena_ and Cleanthes, Stoic philosopher (300-220 B.C.) in his _Hymn to Zeus_ has \Ek sou gar genos esmen\. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:32| Paul quotes from Menander and in strkjv@Titus:1:12| from Epimenides. J. Rendel Harris claims that he finds allusions in Paul's Epistles to Pindar, Aristophanes, and other Greek writers. There is no reason in the world why Paul should not have acquaintance with Greek literature, though one need not strain a point to prove it. Paul, of course, knew that the words were written of Zeus (Jupiter), not of Jehovah, but he applies the idea in them to his point just made that all men are the offspring of God.
rwp@Acts:17:31 @{Inasmuch as} (\kathoti\). According as (\kata, hoti\). Old causal conjunction, but in N.T. only used in Luke's writings (Luke:1:7; strkjv@19:9; strkjv@Acts:2:45; strkjv@4:35; strkjv@17:31|). {Hath appointed a day} (\estsen hmeran\) First aorist active indicative of \histmi\, to place, set. God did set the day in his counsel and he will fulfil it in his own time. {Will judge} (\mellei krinein\). Rather, is going to judge, \mell\ and the present active infinitive of \krin\. Paul here quotes strkjv@Psalms:9:8| where \krinei\ occurs. {By the man whom he hath ordained} (\en andri hi hrisen\). Here he adds to the Psalm the place and function of Jesus Christ, a passage in harmony with Christ's own words in strkjv@Matthew:25|. \Hi\ (whom) is attracted from the accusative, object of \hrisen\ (first aorist active indicative of \horiz\) to the case of the antecedent \andri\. It has been said that Paul left the simple gospel in this address to the council of the Areopagus for philosophy. But did he? He skilfully caught their attention by reference to an altar to an Unknown God whom he interprets to be the Creator of all things and all men who overrules the whole world and who now commands repentance of all and has revealed his will about a day of reckoning when Jesus Christ will be Judge. He has preached the unity of God, the one and only God, has proclaimed repentance, a judgment day, Jesus as the Judge as shown by his Resurrection, great fundamental doctrines, and doubtless had much more to say when they interrupted his address. There is no room here for such a charge against Paul. He rose to a great occasion and made a masterful exposition of God's place and power in human history. {Whereof he hath given assurance} (\pistin paraschn\). Second aorist active participle of \parech\, old verb to furnish, used regularly by Demosthenes for bringing forward evidence. Note this old use of \pistis\ as conviction or ground of confidence (Hebrews:11:1|) like a note or title-deed, a conviction resting on solid basis of fact. All the other uses of \pistis\ grow out of this one from \peith\, to persuade. {In that he hath raised him from the dead} (\anastsas auton ek nekrn\). First aorist active participle of \anistmi\, causal participle, but literally, "having raised him from the dead." This Paul knew to be a fact because he himself had seen the Risen Christ. Paul has here come to the heart of his message and could now throw light on their misapprehension about "Jesus and the Resurrection" (verse 18|). Here Paul has given the proof of all his claims in the address that seemed new and strange to them.
rwp@Acts:18:6 @{When they opposed themselves} (\antitassomenn autn\). Genitive absolute with present middle (direct middle again) of \antitass\, old verb to range in battle array (\tass\) face to face with or against (\anti\). In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:2; strkjv@James:4:6; strkjv@1Peter:5:5|. Paul's fresh activity roused the rabbis as at Antioch in Pisidia and at Thessalonica in concerted opposition and railing (blasphemy). {He shook out his raiment} (\ektinaxamenos ta himatia\). First aorist middle of \ektinass\, old verb, in the N.T. only here as in strkjv@13:51| (middle) and strkjv@Mark:6:11; strkjv@Matthew:10:15| where active voice occurs of shaking out dust also. Vivid and dramatic picture here like that in strkjv@Nehemiah:5:13|, "undoubtedly a very exasperating gesture" (Ramsay), but Paul was deeply stirred. {Your blood be upon your own heads} (\To haima humn epi tn kephaln humn\). As in strkjv@Ezekiel:3:18f., strkjv@33:4,8f.; strkjv@2Samuel:1:16|. Not as a curse, but "a solemn disclaimer of responsibility" by Paul (Page) as in strkjv@Acts:20:26|. The Jews used this very phrase in assuming responsibility for the blood of Jesus (Matthew:27:25|). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:23:35|. {I am clean} (\katharos eg\). Pure from your blood. Repeats the claim made in previous sentence. Paul had done his duty. {From henceforth} (\apo tou nun\). Turning point reached in Corinth. He will devote himself to the Gentiles, though Jews will be converted there also. Elsewhere as in Ephesus (19:1-10|) and in Rome (Acts:28:23-28|) Paul will preach also to Jews.
rwp@Acts:18:25 @{Had been instructed in the way of the Lord} (\n katchmenos tn hodon tou kuriou\). Periphrastic past perfect passive of \katche\, rare in the old Greek and not in the LXX from \kata\ and \che\ (\ch\, sound) as in strkjv@Luke:1:4|, to re-sound, to re-echo, to teach by repeated dinning into the ears as the Arabs do now, to teach orally by word of mouth (and ear). Here the accusative of the thing (the word) is retained in the passive like with \didask\, to teach (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 485). Being fervent in spirit (\zen ti pneumati\). Boiling (from \ze\, to boil, old and common verb, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:12:11|) like boiling water or yeast. The Latin verb _ferveo_ means to boil or ferment. Locative case after it. {Taught carefully} (\edidasken akribs\). Imperfect active, was teaching or inchoative, began teaching, accurately. He taught accurately what he knew, a fine gift for any preacher. {Only the baptism of John} (\monon to baptisma Ianou\). It was a {baptism of repentance} (marked by repentance) as Paul said (13:24; strkjv@19:4|), as Peter said (2:38|) and as the Gospels tell (Mark:1:4|, etc.). That is to say, Apollos knew only what the Baptist knew when he died, but John had preached the coming of the Messiah, had baptized him, had identified him as the Son of God, had proclaimed the baptism of the Holy Spirit, but had not seen the Cross, the Resurrection of Jesus, nor the great Day of Pentecost.
rwp@Acts:18:28 @{Powerfully} (\eutons\). Adverb from \eutonos\ (\eu\, well, \tein\, to stretch), well-strung, at full stretch. {Confuted} (\diakatlegcheto\). Imperfect middle of the double compound verb \dia-kat-elegchomai\, to confute with rivalry in a contest, here alone. The old Greek has \dielegch\, to convict of falsehood, but not this double compound which means to argue down to a finish. It is the imperfect tense and does not mean that Apollos convinced these rabbis, but he had the last word. {Publicly} (\dmosii\). See strkjv@5:18; strkjv@16:37|. In open meeting where all could see the victory of Apollos. {Shewing} (\epideiknus\). Present active participle of \epideiknumi\, old verb to set forth so that all see. {By the Scriptures} (\dia tn graphn\). In which Apollos was so "mighty" (verse 24|) and the rabbis so weak for they knew the oral law better than the written (Mark:7:8-12|). {That Jesus was the Christ} (\einai ton Christon Isoun\). Infinitive and the accusative in indirect assertion. Apollos proclaims the same message that Paul did everywhere (17:3|). He had not yet met Paul, but he had been instructed by Priscilla and Aquila. He is in Corinth building on the foundation laid so well by Paul (1Corinthians:3:4-17|). Luke has here made a brief digression from the story of Paul, but it helps us understand Paul better There are those who think that Apollos wrote Hebrews, a guess that may be correct.
rwp@Acts:19:35 @{The town-clerk} (\ho grammateus\). Ephesus was a free city and elected its own officers and the recorder or secretary was the chief magistrate of the city, though the proconsul of the province of Asia resided there. This officer is not a mere secretary of another officer or like the copyists and students of the law among the Jews, but the most influential person in Ephesus who drafted decrees with the aid of the \stratgoi\, had charge of the city's money, was the power in control of the assembly, and communicated directly with the proconsul. Inscriptions at Ephesus give frequently this very title for their chief officer and the papyri have it also. The precise function varied in different cities. His name appeared on the coin at Ephesus issued in his year of office. {Had quieted the multitude} (\katasteilas ton ochlon\). First aorist active participle of \katastell\, to send down, arrange dress (Euripides), lower (Plutarch), restrain (papyrus example), only twice in the N.T. (here and verse 36|, be quiet), but in LXX and Josephus. He evidently took the rostrum and his very presence as the city's chief officer had a quieting effect on the billowy turmoil and a semblance of order came. He waited, however, till the hubbub had nearly exhausted itself (two hours) and did not speak till there was a chance to be heard. {Saith} (\phsin\). Historical present for vividness. {How that}. Merely participle \ousan\ and accusative \polin\ in indirect discourse, no conjunction at all (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1040ff.), common idiom after \ginsk\, to know. {Temple-keeper} (\nekoron\). Old word from \nes\ (\naos)\, temple, and \kore\, to sweep. Warden, verger, cleaner of the temple, a sacristan. Songs:in Xenophon and Plato. Inscriptions so describe Ephesus as \nekoron ts Artemidos\ as Luke has it here and also applied to the imperial _cultus_ which finally had several such temples in Ephesus. Other cities claimed the same honour of being \nekoros\, but it was the peculiar boast of Ephesus because of the great temple of Artemis. A coin of A.D. 65 describes Ephesus as \nekoros\. There are papyri examples of the term applied to individuals, one to Priene as \nekoros\ of the temple in Ephesus (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). {And of the image which fell down from Jupiter} (\kai tou diopetous\). Supply \agalma\ (image), "the from heaven-fallen image." From Zeus (\Dios\) and \pet\ (\pipt, pipet\), to fall. Zeus (Jupiter) was considered lord of the sky or heaven and that is the idea in \diopetous\ here. The legend about a statue fallen from heaven occurs concerning the statue of Artemis at Tauris, Minerva at Athens, etc. Thus the recorder soothed the vanity (Rackham) of the crowd by appeal to the world-wide fame of Ephesus as sacristan of Artemis and of her heaven-fallen image.
rwp@Acts:20:26 @{I testify} (\marturomai\). Elsewhere in the N.T. only in Paul's Epistles (Galatians:5:3; strkjv@Ephesians:4:17; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:12|). It means "I call to witness" while \marture\ means "I bear witness." {This day} (\en ti smeron hmeri\). The today day, the last day with you, our parting day. {I am pure from the blood of all men} (\katharos eimi apo tou haimatos pantn\). Paul was sensitive on this point as in Corinth (Acts:18:6|). It is much for any preacher to claim and it ought to be true of all. The papyri also give this use of \apo\ with the ablative rather than the mere ablative after \katharos\.
rwp@Acts:20:28 @{Take heed unto yourselves} (\prosechete heautois\). The full phrase had \ton noun\, hold your mind on yourselves (or other object in the dative), as often in old writers and in strkjv@Job:7:17|. But the ancients often used the idiom with \noun\ understood, but not expressed as here and strkjv@Acts:5:35; strkjv@Luke:12:1; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@21:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:4; strkjv@3:8; strkjv@4:13|. \Epeche\ is so used in strkjv@1Timothy:4:16|. {To all the flock} (\panti ti poimnii\). Contracted form of \poimenion = poimn\ (John:10:16|) already in strkjv@Luke:12:32| and also in strkjv@Acts:20:29; strkjv@1Peter:5:2,3|. Common in old Greek. {Hath made} (\etheto\). Did make, second aorist middle indicative of \tithmi\, did appoint. Paul evidently believed that the Holy Spirit calls and appoints ministers. {Bishops} (\episkopous\). The same men termed elders in verse 17| which see. {To shepherd} (\poimainein\). Present active infinitive of purpose of \poimain\, old verb to feed or tend the flock (\poimn, poimnion\), to act as shepherd (\poimn\). These ministers are thus in Paul's speech called elders (verse 17|), bishops (verse 28|), and shepherds (verse 28|). Jesus had used this very word to Peter (John:21:16|, twice \boske\, feed, strkjv@21:15,17|) and Peter will use it in addressing fellow-elders (1Peter:5:2|) with memories, no doubt of the words of Jesus to him. The "elders" were to watch over as "bishops" and "tend and feed as shepherds" the flock. Jesus is termed "the shepherd and bishop of your souls" in strkjv@1Peter:2:25| and "the great Shepherd of the sheep" in strkjv@Hebrews:13:20|. Jesus called himself "the good Shepherd" in strkjv@John:10:11|. {The church of God} (\tn ekklsian tou theou\). The correct text, not "the church of the Lord" or "the church of the Lord and God" (Robertson, _Introduction to Textual Criticism of the N.T._, p. 189). {He purchased} (\periepoisato\). First aorist middle of \peripoie\, old verb to reserve, to preserve (for or by oneself, in the middle). In the N.T. only in Luke strkjv@17:33; strkjv@Acts:20:28; strkjv@1Timothy:3:13|. The substantive \peripoisin\ (preservation, possession) occurs in strkjv@1Peter:2:9| ("a peculiar people" = a people for a possession) and in strkjv@Ephesians:1:14|. {With his own blood} (\dia tou haimatos tou idiou\). Through the agency of (\dia\) his own blood. Whose blood? If \tou theou\ (Aleph B Vulg.) is correct, as it is, then Jesus is here called "God" who shed his own blood for the flock. It will not do to say that Paul did not call Jesus God, for we have strkjv@Romans:9:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:9; strkjv@Titus:2:13| where he does that very thing, besides strkjv@Colossians:1:15-20; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|.
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:23:1 @{Looking steadfastly} (\atenisas\). See on this word strkjv@1:10; strkjv@3:12; strkjv@6:15; strkjv@7:55; strkjv@13:9|. Paul may have had weak eyes, but probably the earnest gaze was to see if he recognized any faces that were in the body that tried Stephen and to which he apparently once belonged. {I have lived before God} (\pepoliteumai ti thei\). Perfect middle indicative of \politeu\, old verb to manage affairs of city (\polis\) or state, to be a citizen, behave as a citizen. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|. The idea of citizenship was Greek and Roman, not Jewish. "He had lived as God's citizen, as a member of God's commonwealth" (Rackham). God (\thei\) is the dative of personal interest. As God looked at it and in his relation to God. {In all good conscience unto this day} (\pasi suneidsei agathi achri tauts ts hmeras\). This claim seems to lack tact, but for brevity's sake Paul sums up a whole speech in it. He may have said much more than Luke here reports along the line of his speech the day before, but Paul did not make this claim without consideration. It appears to contradict his confession as the chief of sinners (1Timothy:1:13-16|). But that depends on one's interpretation of "good conscience." The word \suneidsis\ is literally "joint-knowledge" in Greek, Latin (_conscientia_) and English "conscience" from the Latin. It is a late word from \sunoida\, to know together, common in O.T., Apocrypha, Philo, Plutarch, New Testament, Stoics, ecclesiastical writers. In itself the word simply means consciousness of one's own thoughts (Hebrews:10:2|), or of one's own self, then consciousness of the distinction between right and wrong (Romans:2:15|) with approval or disapproval. But the conscience is not an infallible guide and acts according to the light that it has (1Corinthians:8:7,10; strkjv@1Peter:2:19|). The conscience can be contaminated (Hebrews:10:22|, evil \ponrs\). All this and more must be borne in mind in trying to understand Paul's description of his motives as a persecutor. Alleviation of his guilt comes thereby, but not removal of guilt as he himself felt (1Timothy:1:13-16|). He means to say to the Sanhedrin that he persecuted Christians as a conscientious (though mistaken) Jew (Pharisee) just as he followed his conscience in turning from Judaism to Christianity. It is a pointed disclaimer against the charge that he is a renegade Jew, an opposer of the law, the people, the temple. Paul addresses the Sanhedrin as an equal and has no "apologies" (in our sense) to make for his career as a whole. The golden thread of consistency runs through, as a good citizen in God's commonwealth. He had the consolation of a good conscience (1Peter:3:16|). The word does not occur in the Gospels and chiefly in Paul's Epistles, but we see it at work in strkjv@John:8:9| (the interpolation strkjv@7:53-8:11|).
rwp@Acts:23:6 @{But when Paul perceived} (\gnous de ho Paulos\). Perceiving (second aorist ingressive of \ginsk\). Paul quickly saw that his cause was ruined before the Sanhedrin by his unwitting attack on the high priest. It was impossible to get a fair hearing. Hence, Vincent says, "Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other." Songs:Alford argues with the motto "divide and conquer." Farrar condemns Paul and takes strkjv@24:21| as a confession of error here, but that is reading into Paul's word about the resurrection more than he says. Page considers Luke's report meagre and unsatisfactory. Rackham thinks that the trial was already started and that Paul repeated part of his speech of the day before when "the Sadducees received his words with ostentatious scepticism and ridicule: this provoked counter-expressions of sympathy and credulity among the Pharisees." But all this is inference. We do not have to adopt the Jesuitical principle that the end justifies the means in order to see shrewdness and hard sense in what Paul said and did. Paul knew, of course, that the Sanhedrin was nearly evenly divided between Pharisees and Sadducees, for he himself had been a Pharisee. {I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees} (\Eg Pharisaios eimi huios Pharisain\). This was strictly true as we know from his Epistles (Phillipians:3:5|). {Touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question} (\peri elpidos kai anastases nekrn krinomai\). This was true also and this is the point that Paul mentions in strkjv@24:21|. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke's report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul's cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was "the very centre of his faith" (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (Acts:5:34-39|). Songs:then Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, "Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism" (Page). Paul shows this in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|.
rwp@Acts:24:14 @{I confess} (\homolog\). The only charge left was that of being a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. This Paul frankly confesses is true. He uses the word in its full sense. He is "guilty" of that. {After the Way} (\kata tn hodon\). This word Paul had already applied to Christianity (22:4|). He prefers it to "sect" (\hairesin\ which means a choosing, then a division). Paul claims Christianity to be the real (whole, catholic) Judaism, not a "sect" of it. But he will show that Christianity is not a deviation from Judaism, but the fulfilment of it (Page) as he has already shown in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9|. {Songs:serve I the God of our fathers} (\houts latreu ti patrii thei\). Paul has not stretched the truth at all. He has confirmed the claim made before the Sanhedrin that he is a spiritual Pharisee in the truest sense (23:6|). He reasserts his faith in all the law and the prophets, holding to the Messianic hope. A curious "heretic" surely! {Which these themselves also look for} (\hn kai autoi houtoi prosdechontai\). Probably with a gesture towards his accusers. He does not treat them all as Sadducees. See strkjv@Titus:2:13| for similar use of the verb (\prosdechomenoi tn makarian elpida\, looking for the happy hope).
rwp@Acts:24:16 @{Herein} (\en touti\). His whole confession of belief in verses 14,15|. {Do I also exercise myself} (\kai autos ask\). "Do I also myself take exercise," take pains, labour, strive. Old word in Homer to work as raw materials, to adorn by art, then to drill. Our word ascetic comes from this root, one who seeks to gain piety by rules and severe hardship. Paul claims to be equal to his accusers in efforts to please God. {Void of offence} (\aproskopon\). This word belongs to the papyri and N.T. (only in Paul), not in the ancient writers. The papyri examples (Moulton Milligan, _Vocabulary_) use the word to mean "free from hurt or harm." It is a privative and \proskopt\ (to cut or stumble against). Page likes "void of offence" since that can be either active "not stumbling" as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:10| or passive "not stumbled against" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:32| (the first toward God and the second toward men), the only other N.T. examples. Hence the word here appears in both senses (the first towards God, the second towards men). Paul adds "alway" (\dia pantos\), a bold claim for a consistent aim in life. "Certainly his conscience acquitted him of having caused any offence to his countrymen" (Rackham). Furneaux thinks that it must have been wormwood and gall to Ananias to hear Paul repeat here the same words because of which he had ordered Paul to be smitten on the mouth (23:1f.|).
rwp@Acts:25:19 @{But had} (\de eichon\). Descriptive imperfect active of \ech\ and \de\ of contrast (but). {Concerning their own religion} (\peri ts idias deisidaimonias\). See on ¯17:22| for discussion of this word. Festus would hardly mean "superstition," whatever he really thought, because Agrippa was a Jew. {And of one Jesus} (\kai peri tinos Isou\). This is the climax of supercilious scorn toward both Paul and "one Jesus." {Who was dead} (\tethnkotos\). Perfect active participle of \thnsk\ agreeing with \Isou\ (genitive). As being dead. {Whom Paul affirmed to be alive} (\hon ephasken ho Paulos zin\). Imperfect active of \phask\, old form of \phmi\ to say, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:24:9; strkjv@Romans:1:22|. Infinitive \zin\ in indirect discourse with \hon\ (whom) the accusative of general reference. With all his top-loftical airs Festus has here correctly stated the central point of Paul's preaching about Jesus as no longer dead, but living.
rwp@Acts:25:26 @{No certain thing} (\asphales ti--ou\). Nothing definite or reliable (\a\ privative, \sphall\, to trip). All the charges of the Sanhedrin slipped away or were tripped up by Paul. Festus confesses that he had nothing left and thereby convicts himself of gross insincerity in his proposal to Paul in verse 9| about going up to Jerusalem. By his own statement he should have set Paul free. The various details here bear the marks of the eyewitness. Luke was surely present and witnessed this grand spectacle with Paul as chief performer. {Unto my lord} (\ti kurii\). Augustus (Octavius) and Tiberius refused the title of \kurios\ (lord) as too much like _rex_ (king) and like master and slave, but the servility of the subjects gave it to the other emperors who accepted it (Nero among them). Antoninus Pius put it on his coins. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105) gives an ostracon dated Aug. 4, A.D. 63 with the words "in the year nine of Nero the lord" (\enatou Nernos tou kuriou\). Deissmann (_op. cit._, pp. 349ff.) runs a most interesting parallel "between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \kurios\, lord" in ostraca, papyri, inscriptions. Beyond a doubt Paul has all this fully in mind when he says in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| that "no one is able to say \Kurios Isous\ except in the Holy Spirit" (cf. also strkjv@Phillipians:2:11|). The Christians claimed this word for Christ and it became the test in the Roman persecutions as when Polycarp steadily refused to say " Lord Caesar" and insisted on saying "Lord Jesus" when it meant his certain death. {Before you} (\eph' humn\). The whole company. In no sense a new trial, but an examination in the presence of these prominent men to secure data and to furnish entertainment and pleasure to Agrippa (verse 22|). {Especially before thee} (\malista epi sou\). Out of courtesy. It was the main reason as verse 22| shows. Agrippa was a Jew and Festus was glad of the chance to see what he thought of Paul's case. {After examination had} (\ts anakrises genomens\). Genitive absolute, "the examination having taken place." \Anakrisis\ from \anakrin\ (cf. strkjv@12:19; strkjv@24:8; strkjv@28:18|) is a legal term for preliminary examination. Only here in the N.T. Inscriptions and papyri give it as examination of slaves or other property. {That I may have somewhat to write} (\hops sch ti graps\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive \sch\ (may get) with \hops\ (final particle like \hina\). \Ti graps\ in indirect question after \sch\ is either future indicative or aorist subjunctive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1045). Festus makes it plain that this is not a "trial," but an examination for his convenience to help him out of a predicament.
rwp@Acts:26:3 @{Especially because thou art expert} (\malista gnstn onta se\). Or like the margin, "because thou art especially expert," according as \malista\ is construed. \Gnstn\ is from \ginsk\ and means a knower, expert, connoisseur. Plutarch uses it and Deissmann (_Light_, etc., p. 367) restores it in a papyrus. Agrippa had the care of the temple, the appointment of the high priest, and the care of the sacred vestments. But the accusative \onta se\ gives trouble here coming so soon after \sou\ (genitive with \epi\). Some MSS. insert \epistamenos\ or \eids\ (knowing) but neither is genuine. Page takes it as "governed by the sense of thinking or considering." Knowling considers it an anacoluthon. Buttmann held it to be an accusative absolute after the old Greek idiom. \Tuchon\ is such an instance though used as an adverb (1Corinthians:16:6|). It is possible that one exists in strkjv@Ephesians:1:18|. See other examples discussed in Robertson's _Grammar_, pp. 490f. {Customs and questions} (\ethn te kai ztmatn\). Both _consuetudinum in practicis_ and _quaestionum in theoreticis_ (Bengel). Agrippa was qualified to give Paul an understanding and a sympathetic hearing. Paul understands perfectly the grand-stand play of the whole performance, but he refused to be silent and chose to use this opportunity, slim as it seemed, to get a fresh hearing for his own case and to present the claims of Christ to this influential man. His address is a masterpiece of noble apologetic. {Patiently} (\makrothums\). Adverb from \makrothumos\. Only here in the N.T., though \makrothumia\ occurs several times. Vulgate has _longanimiter_. Long spirit, endurance, opposite of impatience. Songs:Paul takes his time.
rwp@Acts:26:23 @{How that the Christ must suffer} (\ei pathtos ho Christos\). Literally, "if the Messiah is subject to suffering." \Ei\ can here mean "whether" as in strkjv@Hebrews:7:15|. This use of a verbal in \-tos\ for capability or possibility occurs in the N.T. alone in \pathtos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 157). This word occurs in Plutarch in this sense. It is like the Latin _patibilis_ and is from _pasch_. Here alone in N.T. Paul is speaking from the Jewish point of view. Most rabbis had not rightly understood strkjv@Isaiah:53|. When the Baptist called Jesus "the Lamb of God" (John:1:29|) it was a startling idea. It is not then "must suffer" here, but "can suffer." The Cross of Christ was a stumbling-block to the rabbis. {How that he first by the resurrection of the dead} (\ei prtos ex anastases nekrn\). Same construction with \ei\ (whether). This point Paul had often discussed with the Jews: "whether he (the Messiah) by a resurrection of dead people." Others had been raised from the dead, but Christ is the first (\prtos\) who arose from the dead and no longer dies (Romans:6:19|) and proclaims light (\phs mellei kataggellein\). Paul is still speaking from the Jewish standpoint: "is about to (going to) proclaim light." See verse 18| for "light" and strkjv@Luke:2:32|. {Both to the people and to the Gentiles} (\ti te lai kai tois ethnesin\). See verse 17|. It was at the word Gentiles (\ethn\) that the mob lost control of themselves in the speech from the stairs (22:21f.|). Songs:it is here, only not because of that word, but because of the word "resurrection" (\anastasis\).
rwp@Acts:26:27 @{I know that thou believest} (\oida hoti pisteueis\). Paul had "cornered" Agrippa by this direct challenge. As the Jew in charge of the temple he was bound to confess his faith in the prophets. But Paul had interpreted the prophets about the Messiah in a way that fell in with his claim that Jesus was the Messiah risen from the dead. To say, "Yes" would place himself in Paul's hands. To say "No" would mean that he did not believe the prophets. Agrippa had listened with the keenest interest, but he slipped out of the coils with adroitness and a touch of humour.
rwp@Acts:26:29 @{I would to God} (\euxaimn an ti thei\). Conclusion of fourth-class condition (optative with \an\), undetermined with less likelihood, the so-called potential optative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). Polite and courteous wish (first aorist middle optative of \euchomai\). {Whether with little or with much} (\kai en mikri kai en megali\). Literally, "both in little and in great," or "both with little and with great pains" or "both in some measure and in great measure." Paul takes kindly the sarcasm of Agrippa. {Such as I am} (\toioutous hopoios kai eg eimi\). Accusative \toioutous\ with the infinitive \genesthai\. Paul uses these two qualitative pronouns instead of repeating the word "Christian." {Except these bonds} (\parektos tn desmn toutn\). Ablative case with \parektos\ (late preposition for the old \parek\). Paul lifts his right manacled hand with exquisite grace and good feeling.
rwp@Acts:27:9 @{Where much time was spent} (\Hikanou chronou diagenomenou\). Genitive absolute again with second aorist middle participle of \diaginomai\, to come in between (\dia\). "Considerable time intervening," since they became weatherbound in this harbour, though some take it since they left Caesarea. {And the voyage was now dangerous} (\kai ontos d episphalous\). Genitive absolute, "and the voyage being already (\d\=Latin _jam_) dangerous" (old word from \epi\ and \sphall\, to trip, to fall, and so prone to fall, here only in N.T.). {Because the Fast was now already gone by} (\dia to kai tn nsteian d parelluthenai\). Accusative (after \dia\) of the articular infinitive perfect active of \parerchomai\, to pass by, with the accusative of general reference (\nsteian\, the great day of atonement of the Jews, strkjv@Leviticus:16:29ff.|) occurring about the end of September. The ancients considered navigation on the Mediterranean unsafe from early October till the middle of March. In A.D. 59 the Fast occurred on Oct. 5. There is nothing strange in Luke using this Jewish note of time as in strkjv@20:6| though a Gentile Christian. Paul did it also (1Corinthians:16:8|). It is no proof that Luke was a Jewish proselyte. We do not know precisely when the party left Caesarea (possibly in August), but in ample time to arrive in Rome before October if conditions had been more favourable. But the contrary winds had made the voyage very slow and difficult all the way (verse 7|) besides the long delay here in this harbour of Fair Havens. {Paul admonished them} (\parini ho Paulos\). Imperfect active of \paraine\, old word to exhort from \para\ and \aine\, to praise (3:8|), only here and verse 22| in N.T. It is remarkable that a prisoner like Paul should venture to give advice at all and to keep on doing it (imperfect tense inchoative, began to admonish and kept on at it). Paul had clearly won the respect of the centurion and officers and also felt it to be his duty to give this unasked for warning. {I perceive} (\ther\). Old word from \theros\, a spectator. See strkjv@Luke:10:18|. Paul does not here claim prophecy, but he had plenty of experience with three shipwrecks already (2Corinthians:11:25|) to justify his apprehension. {Will be} (\mellein esesthai\). Infinitive in indirect assertion followed by future infinitive after \mellein\ in spite of \hoti\ which would naturally call for present indicative \mellei\, an anacoluthon due to the long sentence (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 478). {With injury} (\meta hubres\). An old word from \huper\ (above, upper, like our "uppishness") and so pride, insult, personal injury, the legal word for personal assault (Page). Josephus (_Ant_. III. 6, 4) uses it of the injury of the elements. {Loss} (\zmian\). Old word, opposite of \kerdos\, gain or profit (Phillipians:3:7f.|). Nowhere else in N.T. {Lading} (\phortiou\). Diminutive of \phortos\ (from \pher\, to bear) only in form. Common word, but in N.T. only here in literal sense, as metaphor in strkjv@Matthew:11:30; strkjv@23:4; strkjv@Luke:11:46; strkjv@Galatians:6:5|. {But also of our lives} (\alla kai tn psuchn\). Common use of \psuch\ for life, originally "breath of life" (Acts:20:10|), and also "soul" (14:2|). Fortunately no lives were lost, though all else was. But this outcome was due to the special mercy of God for the sake of Paul (verse 24|), not to the wisdom of the officers in rejecting Paul's advice. Paul begins now to occupy the leading role in this marvellous voyage.
rwp@Acts:28:23 @{Appointed} (\taxamenoi\). First aorist middle participle of \tass\. Formal arrangement as in strkjv@Matthew:28:16| when Jesus appointed the mountain for his meeting in Galilee. {In great number} (\pleiones\). Comparative of \polus\, "more than a few." {Expounded} (\exetitheto\). Imperfect middle of \ektithmi\, to set forth, as in strkjv@11:4; strkjv@18:26|. He did it with detail and care and spent all day at it, "from morning till evening" (\apo pri hes hesperas\). In N.T. only here, strkjv@4:3| and strkjv@Luke:24:29|, though common word. {Persuading them concerning Jesus} (\peithn autous peri tou Isou\). Conative present active participle, trying to persuade. It was only about Jesus that he could make good his claim concerning the hope of Israel (verse 20|). It was Paul's great opportunity. Songs:he appealed both to Moses and to the prophets for proof as it was his custom to do.
rwp@Acts:28:30 @{Two whole years} (\dietian holn\). Only here in N.T. and strkjv@24:27| which see. During these busy years in Rome Paul wrote Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians, Epistles that would immortalize any man, unless, forsooth, one or more of them was written from Ephesus or Caesarea, which has not yet been proven. {In his own hired dwelling} (\en idii misthmati\). Old word, here only in N.T., that which is hired for a price (from \mistho\ and that from \misthos\, hire). {Received} (\apedecheto\). Imperfect middle of \apodechomai\, received from time to time as they came, all that came (\eisporeuomenous\) from time to time. {Preaching} (\kerussn\), {teaching} (\didaskn\), the two things that concerned Paul most, doing both as if his right hand was not in chains, to the amazement of those in Rome and in Philippi (Phillipians:1:12-14|). {None forbidding him} (\akluts\). Old adverb from \a\ privative and the verbal adjective \klutos\ (from \klu\, to hinder), here only in the N.T. Page comments on "the rhythmic cadence of the concluding words." Page rejects the notion that the book is an unfinished work. It closes with the style of a concluded work. I agree with Harnack that Luke wrote the Acts during this period of two years in Rome and carried events no further because they had gone no further. Paul was still a prisoner in Rome when Luke completed the book. But he had carried Paul to "Rome, the capital of the world, _Urbi et Orbi_" (Page). The gospel of Christ has reached Rome. For the fate of Paul we must turn elsewhere. But Luke had the presence of Paul while he carried the Acts to its triumphant conclusion. Ramsay can give a good deal in proof of his claim that Luke is the greatest of all historians. Beyond a doubt his rank is high and the world can never repay its debt to this cultured physician who wrote the Gospel and the Acts.
rwp@Info_Colossians @ THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS FROM ROME A.D. 63 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION GENUINENESS The author claims to be Paul (Colossians:1:1|) and there is no real doubt about it in spite of Baur's denial of the Pauline authorship which did not suit his _Tendenz_ theory of the New Testament books. There is every mark of Paul's style and power in the little Epistle and there is no evidence that any one else took Paul's name to palm off this striking and vigorous polemic.
rwp@Info_Colossians @ PURPOSE OF THE EPISTLE Epaphras did not come in vain, for Paul was tremendously stirred by the peril to Christianity from the Gnostics (\hoi gnstikoi\, the knowing ones). He had won his fight for freedom in Christ against the Judaizers who tried to fasten Jewish sacramentarianism upon spiritual Christianity. Now there is an equal danger of the dissipation of vital Christianity in philosophic speculation. In particular, the peril was keen concerning the Person of Christ when the Gnostics embraced Christianity and applied their theory of the universe to him. They split into factions on the subject of Christ. The Docetic (from \doke\, to seem) Gnostics held that Jesus did not have a real human body, but only a phantom body. He was, in fact, an aeon and had no real humanity. The Cerinthian (followers of Cerinthus) Gnostics admitted the humanity of the man Jesus, but claimed that the Christ was an aeon that came on Jesus at his baptism in the form of a dove and left him on the Cross so that only the man Jesus died. At once this heresy sharpened the issue concerning the Person of Christ already set forth in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. Paul met the issue squarely and powerfully portrayed his full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Son of Man (both deity and humanity) in opposition to both types of Gnostics. Songs:then Colossians seems written expressly for our own day when so many are trying to rob Jesus Christ of his deity. The Gnostics took varying views of moral issues also as men do now. There were the ascetics with rigorous rules and the licentious element that let down all the bars for the flesh while the spirit communed with God. One cannot understand Colossians without some knowledge of Gnosticism such as may be obtained in such books as Angus's _The Mystery-Religions and Christianity_, Glover's _The Conflict of Religion in the Early Roman Empire_, Kennedy's St. _Paul and the Mystery-Religions_, Lightfoot's _Commentary on Colossians_.
rwp@Colossians:1:10 @{To walk worthily of the Lord} (\peripatsai axis tou Kuriou\). This aorist active infinitive may express purpose or result. Certainly this result is the aim of the right knowledge of God. "The end of all knowledge is conduct" (Lightfoot). See strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:12; strkjv@Phillipians:1:27; strkjv@Ephesians:4:1| for a like use of \axis\ (adverb) with the genitive. {In the knowledge of God} (\ti epignsei tou theou\). Instrumental case, "by means of the full knowledge of God." This is the way for fruit-bearing and growth to come. Note both participles (\karpophorountes kai auxanomenoi\) together as in verse 6|. {Unto all pleasing} (\eis psan areskian\). In order to please God in all things (1Thessalonians:4:1|). \Areskia\ is late word from \areskeu\, to be complaisant (Polybius, Plutarch) and usually in bad sense (obsequiousness). Only here in N.T., but in good sense. It occurs in the good sense in the papyri and inscriptions.
rwp@Colossians:1:17 @{Before all things} (\pro pantn\). \Pro\ with the ablative case. This phrase makes Paul's meaning plain. The precedence of Christ in time and the preeminence as Creator are both stated sharply. See the claim of Jesus to eternal timeless existence in strkjv@John:8:58; strkjv@17:5|. See also strkjv@Revelation:23:13| where Christ calls himself the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning (\arch\) and the End (\telos\). Paul states it also in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {Consist} (\sunestken\). Perfect active indicative (intransitive) of \sunistmi\, old verb, to place together and here to cohere, to hold together. The word repeats the statements in verse 16|, especially that in the form \ektistai\. Christ is the controlling and unifying force in nature. The Gnostic philosophy that matter is evil and was created by a remote aeon is thus swept away. The Son of God's love is the Creator and the Sustainer of the universe which is not evil.
rwp@Colossians:1:20 @{Through him} (\di' autou\). As the sufficient and chosen agent in the work of reconciliation (\apokatallaxai\, first aorist active infinitive of \apokatallass\, further addition to \eudoksen\, was pleased). This double compound (\apo, kata\ with \allass\) occurs only here, verse 22; strkjv@Ephesians:2:16|, and nowhere else so far as known. Paul's usual word for "reconcile" is \katallass\ (2Corinthians:5:18-20; strkjv@Romans:5:10|), though \diallass\ (Matthew:5:24|) is more common in Attic. The addition of \apo\ here is clearly for the idea of complete reconciliation. See on ¯2Corinthians:5:18-20| for discussion of \katallass\, Paul's great word. The use of \ta panta\ (the all things, the universe) as if the universe were somehow out of harmony reminds us of the mystical passage in strkjv@Romans:8:19-23| which see for discussion. Sin somehow has put the universe out of joint. Christ will set it right. {Unto himself} (\eis auton\). Unto God, though \auton\ is not reflexive unless written \hauton\. {Having made peace} (\eirnopoisas\). Late and rare compound (Proverbs:10:10| and here only in N.T.) from \eirnopoios\, peacemaker (Matthew:5:9|; here only in N.T.). In strkjv@Ephesians:2:15| we have \poin eirnn\ (separate words) {making peace}. Not the masculine gender, though agreeing with the idea of Christ involved even if \plrma\ be taken as the subject of \eudoksen\, a participial anacoluthon (construction according to sense as in strkjv@2:19|). If \theos\ be taken as the subject of \eudoksen\ the participle \eirnopoisas\ refers to Christ, not to \theos\ (God). {Through the blood of his cross} (\dia tou haimatos tou staurou autou\). This for the benefit of the Docetic Gnostics who denied the real humanity of Jesus and as clearly stating the _causa medians_ (Ellicott) of the work of reconciliation to be the Cross of Christ, a doctrine needed today. {Or things in the heavens} (\eite ta en tois ouranois\). Much needless trouble has been made over this phrase as if things in heaven were not exactly right. It is rather a hypothetical statement like verse 16| not put in categorical form (Abbott), _universitas rerum_ (Ellicott).
rwp@Colossians:1:23 @{If so be that ye continue in the faith} (\ei ge epimenete ti pistei\). Condition of the first class (determined as fulfilled), with a touch of eagerness in the use of \ge\ (at least). \Epi\ adds to the force of the linear action of the present tense (continue and then some). {Pistei} is in the locative case (in faith). {Grounded} (\tethemelimenoi\). Perfect passive participle of \themelio\, old verb from \themelios\ (adjective, from \thema\ from \tithmi\, laid down as a foundation, substantive, strkjv@1Corinthians:3:11f.|). Picture of the saint as a building like strkjv@Ephesians:2:20|. {Steadfast} (\hedraioi\). Old adjective from \hedra\ (seat). In N.T. only here, strkjv@1Corinthians:7:37; strkjv@15:58|. Metaphor of seated in a chair. {Not moved away} (\m metakinoumenoi\). Present passive participle (with negative \m\) of \metakine\, old verb, to move away, to change location, only here in N.T. Negative statement covering the same ground. {From the hope of the gospel} (\apo ts elpidos tou euaggeliou\). Ablative case with \apo\. The hope given by or in the gospel and there alone. {Which ye heard} (\hou kousate\). Genitive case of relative either by attraction or after \kousate\. The Colossians had in reality heard the gospel from Epaphras. {Preached} (\kruchthentos\). First aorist passive participle of \kruss\, to herald, to proclaim. {In all creation} (\en pasi ktisei\). \Ktisis\ is the act of founding (Romans:1:20|) from \ktiz\ (verse 16|), then a created thing (Romans:1:25|), then the sum of created things as here and strkjv@Revelation:3:14|. It is hyperbole, to be sure, but Paul does not say that all men are converted, but only that the message has been heralded abroad over the Roman Empire in a wider fashion than most people imagine. {A minister} (\diakonos\). General term for service (\dia, konis\, raising a dust by speed) and used often as here of preachers like our "minister" today, one who serves. Jesus used the verb \diakonsai\ of himself (Mark:10:45|). Our "deacon" is this word transliterated and given a technical meaning as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:1|.
rwp@Colossians:1:28 @{Whom} (\hon\). That is, "Christ in you, the hope of glory." {We proclaim} (\kataggellomen\). Paul, Timothy and all like-minded preachers against the Gnostic depreciation of Christ. This verb originally (Xenophon) meant to denounce, but in N.T. it means to announce (\aggell\) throughout (\kata\), to proclaim far and wide (Acts:13:5|). {Admonishing} (\nouthetountes\). Old verb from \nouthets\, admonisher (from \nous, tithmi\). See already strkjv@Acts:20:31; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12,14; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:15|, etc. Warning about practice and teaching (\didaskontes\) about doctrine. Such teaching calls for "all wisdom" {Every man} (\panta anthrpon\). Repeated three times. "In opposition to the doctrine of an intellectual exclusiveness taught by the false teachers" (Abbott). {That we may present} (\hina parastsmen\). Final use of \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \paristmi\, for which see strkjv@1:22|, the final presentation to Christ. {Perfect} (\teleion\). Spiritual adults in Christ, no longer babes in Christ (Hebrews:5:14|), mature and ripened Christians (4:22|), the full-grown man in Christ (Ephesians:4:13|). The relatively perfect (Phillipians:3:15|) will on that day of the presentation be fully developed as here (Colossians:4:12; strkjv@Ephesians:4:13|). The Gnostics used \teleios\ of the one fully initiated into their mysteries and it is quite possible that Paul here has also a sidewise reference to their use of the term.
rwp@Colossians:2:9 @{For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily} (\hoti en auti katoikei pn to plrma ts theottos smatiks\). In this sentence, given as the reason (\hoti\, because) for the preceding claim for Christ as the measure of human knowledge Paul states the heart of his message about the Person of Christ. There dwells (at home) in Christ not one or more aspects of the Godhead (the very \essence\ of God, from \theos, deitas\) and not to be confused with \theiotes\ in strkjv@Romans:1:20| (from \theios\, the {quality} of God, _divinitas_), here only in N.T. as \theiots\ only in strkjv@Romans:1:20|. The distinction is observed in Lucian and Plutarch. \Theiots\ occurs in the papyri and inscriptions. Paul here asserts that "all the \plrma\ of the Godhead," not just certain aspects, dwells in Christ and in bodily form (\smatiks\, late and rare adverb, in Plutarch, inscription, here only in N.T.), dwells now in Christ in his glorified humanity (Phillipians:2:9-11|), "the body of his glory" (\ti smati ts doxs\). The fulness of the God-head was in Christ before the Incarnation (John:1:1,18; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6|), during the Incarnation (John:1:14,18; strkjv@1John:1:1-3|). It was the Son of God who came in the likeness of men (Phillipians:2:7|). Paul here disposes of the Docetic theory that Jesus had no human body as well as the Cerinthian separation between the man Jesus and the aeon Christ. He asserts plainly the deity and the humanity of Jesus Christ in corporeal form.
rwp@Colossians:3:2 @{Set your mind on} (\phroneite\). "Keep on thinking about." It does matter what we think and we are responsible for our thoughts. {Not on the things that are upon the earth} (\m ta epi ts gs\). Paul does not mean that we should never think the things upon the earth, but that these should not be our aim, our goal, our master. The Christian has to keep his feet upon the earth, but his head in the heavens. He must be heavenly-minded here on earth and so help to make earth like heaven.
rwp@Ephesians:1:7 @{In whom} (\en hi\). Just like strkjv@Colossians:1:14| with \paraptmatn\ (trespasses) in place of \hamartin\ (sins) and with the addition of \dia tou haimatos autou\ (through his blood) as in strkjv@Colossians:1:20|. Clearly Paul makes the blood of Christ the cost of redemption, the ransom money (\lutron\, strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@Mark:10:45|; \antilutron\, strkjv@1Timothy:2:6|). See strkjv@Colossians:1:9|.
rwp@Ephesians:1:21 @{Far above all rule} (\huperan pass archs\). Late compound adverbial preposition (\huper, an\) with the ablative case. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|. As in strkjv@Colossians:1:16|, so here Paul claims primacy for Jesus Christ above all angels, aeons, what not. These titles all were used in the Gnostic speculations with a graduated angelic hierarchy. {World} (\aini\). "Age." See this identical expression in strkjv@Matthew:12:32| for the present time (Gal strkjv@1:4; strkjv@1Timothy:6:17|) and the future life (Ephesians:2:7; strkjv@Luke:20:35|). Both combined in strkjv@Mark:10:30; strkjv@Luke:18:30|.
rwp@Ephesians:2:13 @{But now} (\nuni de\). Strong contrast, as opposed to "at that time." {Afar off} (\makran\). Adverb (accusative feminine adjective with \hodon\ understood). From the \politeia\ and its hope in God. {Are made nigh} (\egenthte eggus\). First aorist passive indicative of \ginomai\, a sort of timeless aorist. Nigh to the commonwealth of Israel in Christ. {In the blood of Christ} (\en ti haimati tou Christou\). Not a perfunctory addition, but essential (1:7|), particularly in view of the Gnostic denial of Christ's real humanity.
rwp@Ephesians:3:5 @{In other generations} (\heterais geneais\). Locative case of time. He had already claimed this revelation for himself (verse 3|). Now he claims it for all the other apostles and prophets of God.
rwp@Ephesians:6:11 @{Put on} (\endusasthe\). Like strkjv@3:12|. See also strkjv@4:24|. {The whole armour} (\tn panoplian\). Old word from \panoplos\ (wholly armed, from \pan, hoplon\). In N.T. only strkjv@Luke:11:22; strkjv@Ephesians:6:11,13|. Complete armour in this period included "shield, sword, lance, helmet, greaves, and breastplate" (Thayer). Our "panoply." Polybius gives this list of Thayer. Paul omits the lance (spear). Our museums preserve specimens of this armour as well as the medieval coat-of-mail. Paul adds girdle and shoes to the list of Polybius, not armour but necessary for the soldier. Certainly Paul could claim knowledge of the Roman soldier's armour, being chained to one for some three years. {That ye may be able to stand} (\pros to dunasthai hums stnai\). Purpose clause with \pros to\ and the infinitive (\dunasthai\) with the accusative of general reference (\hums\) and the second aorist active infinitive \stnai\ (from \histmi\) dependent on \dunasthai\. Against (\pros\). Facing. Another instance of \pros\ meaning "against" (Colossians:2:23|). {The wiles of the devil} (\tas methodias tou diabolou\). See already strkjv@4:14| for this word. He is a crafty foe and knows the weak spots in the Christian's armour.
rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ THE EPISTLES OF PAUL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION IMPORTANCE OF PAUL'S WORK It is impossible to put too much emphasis on the life and work of Paul as the great interpreter of Christ. He has been misunderstood in modern times as he was during his career. Some accuse him of perverting the pure gospel of Christ about the Kingdom of God into a theological and ecclesiastical system. He has been accused of rabbinizing the gospel by carrying over his Pharisaism, while others denounce him for Hellenizing the gospel with Greek philosophy and the Greek mystery-religions. But out of all the welter of attacks Paul's Epistles stand as the marvellous expression of his own conception of Christ and the application of the gospel to the life of the Christians in the Graeco-Roman world in which they lived by eternal principles that apply to us today. In order to understand Paul's Epistles one must know the Acts of the Apostles in which Luke has drawn with graphic power the sudden change of the foremost opponent of Christ into the chief expounder and proclaimer of the gospel of the Risen Christ. The Acts and the Epistles supplement each other in a marvellous way, though chiefly in an incidental fashion. It is by no means certain that Luke had access to any of Paul's Epistles before he wrote the Acts, though that was quite possible for the early Epistles. It does not greatly matter for Luke had access to Paul himself both in Caesarea and in Rome. The best life of Paul one can get comes by combining the Acts with the Epistles if he knows how to do it. Paul is Luke's hero, but he has not overdrawn the picture in the Acts as is made clear by the Epistles themselves which reveal his own grasp and growth. The literature on Paul is vast and constantly growing. He possesses a fascination for students of the New Testament and of Christianity. It is impossible here to allude even to the most important in so vast a field. Conybeare and Howson's _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_ still has value. Sir W. M. Ramsay has a small library on Paul and his Epistles. Stalker's masterful little book on Paul still grips men as does the work of Sabatier. Deissmann's _St. Paul _ continues to throw light on the great Apostle to the Gentiles. Those who wish my own view at greater length will find them in my various books on Paul (_Epochs in the Life of Paul_, _Paul the Interpreter of Christ_, etc.).
rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ The study of Paul's Epistles in the order of their writing is the best possible way of seeing his own growth as a theologian and interpreter of Christ. Sabatier long ago laid emphasis on this point in his book _The Apostle Paul_ as did Matheson in _The Spiritual Development of Paul_. It is a tragedy to have to read Paul's Epistles as printed in the usual Greek text of Westcott and Hort and the English translations, beginning with Romans and ending with Philemon. In the manuscripts that give Paul's Epistles Romans comes first as the largest and most important, but Titus and Philemon come after II Timothy (the last just before his death). We know something of Paul's early preaching how he laid emphasis on the Messiahship of Jesus proven by his resurrection, Paul himself having seen the Risen Christ (Acts:9:22|). This conviction and experience lay at the foundation of all his work and he never faltered concerning it (Acts:17:3). In the earliest sermon of which we have a full report Paul proclaims justification by faith in Christ with forgiveness of sins (Acts:13:38f.|), blessings not obtained by the law of Moses. In the unfolding life of Paul he grappled with great problems of Jewish rabbinism and Greek philosophy and mystery-religions and Paul himself grew in stature as he courageously and victoriously faced Judaizer and Gnostic. There are scholars who claim that Paul surrendered to the appeal of Gnostic sacramentarianism and so went back on his great doctrine of justification by faith, not by works. It will be shown at the proper time that this view misinterprets Paul's attitude. The events given by Luke in the Acts fit in with the self-revelation of Paul in his own Epistles as we read them. Each one of the four groups of Epistles has a slightly different style and vocabulary as is natural when one comes to think of it. The same thing is true of the plays of Shakespeare and the poems of Milton. Style is the man, Buffon says. Yes, but style is also a function of the subject. Particularly is this true of vocabulary which has to vary with the different topics treated. But style in the same man varies with different ages. Ripened old age mellows the exuberance of youth and the passionate vehemence of manhood. We shall see Paul himself in his Epistles, letting himself go in various ways and in different moods. But in all the changing phases of his life and work there is the same masterful man who glories in being the slave of Jesus Christ and the Apostle to the Gentiles. The passion of Paul is Christ and one can feel the throb of the heart of the chief of sinners who became the chief of saints in all his Epistles. There is the Pauline glow and glory in them all.
rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ SOME BOOKS ON THE PAULINE EPISTLES Bate, _As a Whole Guide to the Epistles of St. Paul_ (1927). Bonnet-Schroeder, _Epitres de Paul_ (4 ed. 1912). Champlain, _The Epistles of Paul_ (1906). Clemen, _Einheitlichkeit d. paul. Briefe_ (1894). Conybeare and Howson, _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_. Drummond, _The Epistles of Paul the Apostle_ (1899). Hayes, _Paul and His Epistles_ (1915). Heinrici, _Die Forschungen uber die paul. Briefe_ (1886). Lake, _The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul_ (1915). Lewin, _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_. (1875). Neil, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1906). Scott, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1909). Shaw, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1903). Vischer, _Die Paulusbriefe_ (1910). Voelter, _Die Composition der paul. Haupt Briefe_ (1890). Voelter, _Paulus und seine Briefe_ (1905). Way, _The Letters of Paul to Seven Churches and Three Friends_ (1906) Weinel, _Die Echtheit der paul. Hauptbriefe_ (1920). Weiss, B., _Present Status of the Inquiry Concerning the Genuineness of the Pauline Epistles_ (1901). Weiss, B., _Die Paulinische Briefe_ (1902). Wood, _Life, Letters, and Religion of St. Paul_ (1925). strkjv@Galatians:1:1 @{Not from men, neither through men} (\ouk ap' anthrpn oude di' anthrpou\). The bluntness of Paul's denial is due to the charge made by the Judaizers that Paul was not a genuine apostle because not one of the twelve. This charge had been made in Corinth and called forth the keenest irony of Paul (2Corinthians:10-12|). In strkjv@Galatians:1; 2| Paul proves his independence of the twelve and his equality with them as recognized by them. Paul denies that his apostleship had a human source (\ouk ap' anthrpn\) and that it had come to him through (\di' anthrpou\) a human channel (Burton). {But through Jesus Christ and God the Father} (\alla dia Isou Christou kai theou patros\). The call to be an apostle came to Paul through Jesus Christ as he claimed in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:1| and as told in strkjv@Acts:9:4-6; strkjv@22:7ff.; strkjv@26:16ff|. He is apostle also by the will of God. {Who raised him from the dead} (\tou egeirantos auton ek nekrn\). And therefore Paul was qualified to be an apostle since he had seen the Risen Christ (1Corinthians:9:1; strkjv@15:8f.|). This verb \egeir\ is often used in N.T. for raising from the sleep of death, to wake up the dead.
rwp@Galatians:1:9 @{Songs:say I now again} (\kai arti palin leg\). Paul knows that he has just made what some will consider an extreme statement. But it is a deliberate one and not mere excitement. He will stand by it to the end. He calls down a curse on any one who proclaims a gospel to them contrary to that which they had received from him.
rwp@Galatians:1:14 @{I advanced} (\proekopton\). Imperfect active again of \prokopt\, old verb, to cut forward (as in a forest), to blaze a way, to go ahead. In N.T. only here, strkjv@Romans:13:12; strkjv@2Timothy:2:16; strkjv@3:9,13|. Paul was a brilliant pupil under Gamaliel. See strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-6|. He was in the lead of the persecution also. {Beyond many of mine own age} (\huper pollous sunlikitas\). Later compound form for the Attic \hlikits\ which occurs in Dion Hal. and inscriptions (from \sun\, with, and \hlikia\, age). Paul modestly claims that he went "beyond" (\huper\) his fellow-students in his progress in Judaism. {More exceedingly zealous} (\perissoters zlots\). Literally, "more exceedingly a zealot." See on ¯Acts:1:13; strkjv@21:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:12|. Like Simon Zelotes. {For the traditions of my fathers} (\tn patrikn mou paradosen\). Objective genitive after \zlots\. \Patrikn\ only here in N.T., though old word from \patr\ (father), paternal, descending from one's father. For \patrios\ see strkjv@Acts:22:3,14|. Tradition (\paradosis\) played a large part in the teaching and life of the Pharisees (Mark:7:1-23|). Paul now taught the Christian tradition (2Thessalonians:2:15|).
rwp@Galatians:1:16 @{To reveal his Son in me} (\apokalupsai ton huion autou en emoi\). By "in me" (\en emoi\) Paul can mean to lay emphasis on his inward experience of grace or he may refer objectively to the vision of Christ on the way to Damascus, "in my case." Paul uses \en emoi\ in this sense (in my case) several times (verse 24; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:3; strkjv@Phillipians:1:30; strkjv@1Timothy:1:16|). Once (1Corinthians:14:11|) \en emoi\ is almost equivalent to the dative (to me). On the whole Lightfoot seems correct here in taking it to mean "in my case," though the following words suit either idea. Certainly Paul could not preach Christ among the Gentiles without the rich inward experience and in the objective vision he was called to that task. {I conferred not with flesh and blood} (\ou prosanethemn sarki kai haimati\). Second aorist middle indicative of \prosanatithmi\, old verb, double compound (\pros, ana\), to lay upon oneself in addition, to betake oneself to another, to confer with, dative case as here. In N.T. only here and strkjv@2:6|.
rwp@Galatians:2:21 @{I do not make void the grace of God} (\ouk athet tn charin tou theou\). Common word in LXX and Polybius and on, to make ineffective (\a\ privative and \tithmi\, to place or put). Some critic would charge him with that after his claim to such a close mystic union with Christ. {Then Christ died for nought} (\ara Christos drean apethanen\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. If one man apart from grace can win his own righteousness, any man can and should. Hence (\ara\, accordingly) Christ died gratuitously (\drean\), unnecessarily. Adverbial accusative of \drea\, a gift. This verse is a complete answer to those who say that the heathen (or any mere moralist) are saved by doing the best that they know and can. No one, apart from Jesus, ever did the best that he knew or could. To be saved by law (\dia nomou\) one has to keep all the law that he knows. That no one ever did.
rwp@Hebrews:1:2 @{At the end of these days} (\ep' eschatou tn hmern toutn\). In contrast with \palai\ above. {Hath spoken} (\elalsen\). First aorist indicative of \lale\, the same verb as above, "did speak" in a final and full revelation. {In his Son} (\en huii\). In sharp contrast to \en tois prophtais\. "The Old Testament slopes upward to Christ" (J. R. Sampey). No article or pronoun here with the preposition \en\, giving the absolute sense of "Son." Here the idea is not merely what Jesus said, but what he is (Dods), God's Son who reveals the Father (John:1:18|). "The revelation was a _son-revelation_" (Vincent). {Hath appointed} (\ethken\). First aorist (kappa aorist) active of \tithmi\, a timeless aorist. {Heir of all things} (\klronomon pantn\). See strkjv@Mark:12:6| for \ho klronomos\ in Christ's parable, perhaps an allusion here to this parable (Moffatt). The idea of sonship easily passes into that of heirship (Galatians:4:7; strkjv@Romans:8:17|). See the claim of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@28:18| even before the Ascension. {Through whom} (\di' hou\). The Son as Heir is also the Intermediate Agent (\dia\) in the work of creation as we have it in strkjv@Colossians:1:16f.; strkjv@John:1:3|. {The worlds} (\tous ainas\). "The ages" (_secula_, Vulgate). See strkjv@11:3| also where \tous ainas=ton kosmon\ (the world) or the universe like \ta panta\ (the all things) in strkjv@1:3; strkjv@Romans:11:36; strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. The original sense of \ain\ (from \aei\, always) occurs in strkjv@Hebrews:5:20|, but here "by metonomy of the container for the contained" (Thayer) for "the worlds" (the universe) as in LXX, Philo, Josephus.
rwp@Hebrews:2:14 @{Are sharers in flesh and blood} (\kekoinnken haimatos kai sarkos\). The best MSS. read "blood and flesh." The verb is perfect active indicative of \koinne\, old verb with the regular genitive, elsewhere in the N.T. with the locative (Romans:12:13|) or with \en\ or \eis\. "The children have become partners (\koinnoi\) in blood and flesh." {Partook} (\metesche\). Second aorist active indicative of \metech\, to have with, a practical synonym for \koinne\ and with the genitive also (\tn autn\). That he might bring to nought (\hina katargsi\). Purpose of the incarnation clearly stated with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \katarge\, old word to render idle or ineffective (from \kata, argos\), causative verb (25 times in Paul), once in Luke (Luke:13:7|), once in Hebrews (here). "By means of death" (his own death) Christ broke the power (\kratos\) of the devil over death (paradoxical as it seems), certainly in men's fear of death and in some unexplained way Satan had sway over the realm of death (Zechariah:3:5f.|). Note the explanatory \tout' estin\ (that is) with the accusative after it as before it. In strkjv@Revelation:12:7| Satan is identified with the serpent in Eden, though it is not done in the Old Testament. See strkjv@Romans:5:12; strkjv@John:8:44; strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11; strkjv@1John:3:12|. Death is the devil's realm, for he is the author of sin. "Death as death is no part of the divine order" (Westcott).
rwp@Hebrews:3:3 @{Hath been counted worthy of more glory than Moses} (\pleionos doxs para Musn xitai\). Perfect passive indicative of \axio\, to deem worthy, permanent situation described with definite claim of Christ's superiority to Moses. \Doxs\ in genitive case after \xitai\. For \para\ after the comparative \pleionos\ see strkjv@1:4,9; strkjv@2:7|. {By so much as} (\kath' hoson\). A proportionate measurement (common use of \kata\ and the quantitative relative \hosos\). {Than the house} (\tou oikou\). Ablative case of comparison after \pleiona\. The architect is superior to the house just as Sir Christopher Wren is superior to St. Paul's Cathedral. The point in the argument calls for Jesus as the builder (\ho kataskeuasas\, first aorist active participle of \kataskeuaz\, to found or build). But it is God's house as \autou\ means (verses 2,5|) and \hou\ in verse 6|. This house of God existed before Moses (11:2,25|). Jesus as God's Son founded and supervised this house of God.
rwp@Hebrews:4:16 @{Let us therefore draw near} (\proserchmetha oun\). Present active middle volitive subjunctive of \proserchomai\. "Let us keep on coming to" our high priest, this sympathizing and great high priest. Instead of deserting him, let us make daily use of him. This verb in Hebrews means reverent approach for worship (7:25; strkjv@10:1,22; strkjv@11:6|). {Unto the throne of grace} (\ti throni ts charitos\). This old word (\thronos\) we have taken into English, the seat of kings and of God and so of Christ (1:3,8|), but marked by grace because Jesus is there (Matthew:19:28|). Hence we should come "with boldness" (\meta parrsias\). Telling Jesus the whole story of our shortcomings. {That we may receive mercy} (\hina labmen eleos\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \lamban\. {And find grace} (\kai charin heurmen\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \heurisk\. We are sure to gain both of these aims because Jesus is our high priest on the throne. {To help us in time of need} (\eis eukairon botheian\). \Botheia\ is old word (from \bothe\, strkjv@2:18| which see), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:27:17|. \Eukairos\ is an old word also (\eu\, well, \kairos\, opportunity), only here in N.T. "For well-timed help," "for help in the nick of time," before too late.
rwp@Hebrews:5:5 @{Songs:Christ also} (\houts kai ho Christos\). Just as with Aaron. Jesus had divine appointment as high priest also. {To be made} (\genthnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \ginomai\. {High priest} (\archierea\). Predicate accusative agreeing with \heauton\ (himself) object of \edoxasen\. {But he that spake unto him} (\all' ho lalsas pros auton\). Ellipsis of \edoxasen\ to be supplied from preceding clause. God did glorify Jesus in appointing him priest as we see in strkjv@Psalms:2:7| quoted already as Messianic (Hebrews:1:5|). Jesus himself repeatedly claimed that the Father sent him on his mission to the world (John:5:30,43; strkjv@8:54; strkjv@17:5|, etc.). Bruce holds that Christ's priesthood is co-eval with his Sonship. Davidson thinks it is merely suitable because he is Son. Clearly the Father nominated (Dods) the Son to the Messianic priesthood (John:3:16|).
rwp@Hebrews:9:7 @{Alone} (\monos\). Predicate adjective with \ho archiereus\. {Once in the year} (\hapax tou eniautou\). Once for each year (not \pote\, at any time) with genitive of time. {Not without blood} (\ou chris haimatos\). According to strkjv@Leviticus:16:14f|. Not even he could enter the second tent (Holy of Holies) without blood. {The errors of the people} (\tn tou laou agnomatn\). Late word from \agnoe\, not to know (5:2|), only here in the N.T., but in LXX, papyri, and inscriptions where a distinction is drawn between errors (\agnomata\) and crimes (\harmartmata\). In strkjv@Genesis:43:12| \agnoma\ is "an oversight." But these sins of ignorance (\agnomata\) were sins and called for atonement. See strkjv@Hebrews:10:26| for wilful sinning.
rwp@Hebrews:9:12 @{Through his own blood} (\dia tou idiou haimatos\). This is the great distinction between Christ as High Priest and all other high priests. They offer blood (verse 7|), but he offered his own blood. He is both victim and High Priest. See the same phrase in strkjv@13:12; strkjv@Acts:20:28|. {Once for all} (\ephapax\). In contrast to the repeated (annual) entrances of the Levitical high priests (9:7|). {Into the holy place} (\eis ta hagia\). Here, as in verses 8,24| heaven itself. {Having obtained} (\heuramenos\). First aorist middle (indirect) participle of \heurisk\, simultaneous action with \eislthen\, and by or of himself "as the issue of personal labour directed to this end" (Westcott). The value of Christ's offering consists in the fact that he is the Son of God as well as the Son of man, that he is sinless and so a perfect sacrifice with no need of an offering for himself, and that it is voluntary on his part (John:10:17|). \Lutrsis\ (from \lutro\) is a late word for the act of ransoming (cf. \lutron\, ransom), in O.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:1:68; strkjv@2:38|. But \apolutrsis\ elsewhere (as in strkjv@Luke:21:28; strkjv@Romans:3:24; strkjv@Hebrews:9:15; strkjv@11:35|). For "eternal" (\ainian\, here feminine form) see strkjv@6:2|. The author now turns to discuss the better sacrifice (9:13-10:18|) already introduced.
rwp@Hebrews:9:25 @{That he should offer himself often} (\hina pollakis prospheri heauton\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \prospher\ (keep on offering himself, like strkjv@5:1,3|). {With blood not his own} (\en haimati allotrii\). So-called instrumental use of \en\ (accompaniment). \allotrios\ means "belonging to another," "not one's own" (Luke:16:12|).
rwp@Hebrews:10:12 @{When he had offered} (\prosenegkas\). Second aorist active participle (with first aorist ending \-as\ in place of \-on\) of \prospher\, single act in contrast to present participle \prosphern\ above. {One sacrifice} (\mian thusian\). This the main point. The one sacrifice does the work that the many failed to do. One wonders how priests who claim that the "mass" is the sacrifice of Christ's body repeated explain this verse. {For ever} (\eis to dinekes\). Can be construed either with \mian thusian\ or with \ekathisen\ (sat down). See strkjv@1:3| for \ekathisen\.
rwp@Hebrews:10:19 @{Having therefore} (\echontes oun\). The author now gives a second (the first in strkjv@8:1-6|) resum of the five arguments concerning the superior priestly work of Christ (10:19-25|) coupled with an earnest exhortation like that in strkjv@4:14-16|, with which he began the discussion, before he proceeds to treat at length the fifth and last one, the better promises in Christ (10:26-12:3|). {Boldness} (\parrsian\). This is the dominant note all through the Epistle (3:6; strkjv@4:16; strkjv@10:19,35|). They were tempted to give up Christ, to be quitters. Boldness (courage) is the need of the hour. {Into the holy place} (\tn hagin\). That is, the heavenly sanctuary where Jesus is (6:18-20|). This is the better sanctuary (9:1-12|). {By the blood of Jesus} (\en ti haimati Isou\). This is the better sacrifice just discussed (9:13-10:18|).
rwp@Hebrews:11:28 @{He kept} (\pepoiken\). Perfect active indicative of \poie\, to make, "he has made," emphasizing the permanent nature of the feast. {The sprinkling of the blood} (\tn proschusin tou haimatos\). Rather, "the pouring of the blood" (\proschusis\ from \prosche\, to pour upon), only here in the N.T. (earliest known example). An allusion to the command in strkjv@Exodus:12:7,22| but in the LXX \prosche\ is the usual term for the act (Exodus:24:6; strkjv@29:16; strkjv@Leviticus:1:5,11; strkjv@Deuteronomy:16:6|). {That the destroyer of the first-born should not touch them} (\hina m ho olothreun ta prtotoka thigi autn\). Negative final clause with \hina m\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \thiggan\, old verb to touch with genitive, in the N.T. only here, strkjv@12:20; strkjv@Colossians:2:21|. The articular participle \ho olothreun\ is from strkjv@Exodus:11:23|. For \prtotoka\ see strkjv@Luke:2:7; strkjv@Exodus:12:29|.
rwp@Hebrews:13:11 @{Of those beasts whose blood} (\hn zn to haima toutn\). The antecedent (\zn\) of \hn\ is here incorporated and attracted into the case of the relative, "the blood of which beasts" and then \toutn\ (genitive demonstrative) is added, "of these." Cf. strkjv@Leviticus:4:12f.,21; strkjv@16:27| for the Old Testament ritual in such cases. This is the only example in the LXX or N.T. where \zn\ (animal) is used of a sacrificial victim. See also strkjv@Exodus:29:14; strkjv@32:26f.| for burning without the camp.
rwp@Hebrews:13:12 @{Wherefore Jesus also} (\dio kai Isous\). The parallel is drawn between the O.T. ritual and the better sacrifice of Jesus already discussed (9:13-10:18|). The purpose of Jesus is shown (\hina hagiasi\, \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hagiaz\, to sanctify), the means employed (\dia tou idiou haimatos\, by his own blood), the place of his suffering (\epathen\, as in strkjv@5:8|) is also given (\ex ts puls\, outside the gate, implied in strkjv@John:19:17|) which phrase corresponds to "outside the camp" of verse 11|.
rwp@Hebrews:13:20 @{The God of peace} (\ho theos ts eirns\). God is the author and giver of peace, a Pauline phrase (6 times) as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23|. {Who brought again from the dead} (\ho anagagn ek nekrn\). Second aorist active articular participle of \anag\ (cf. strkjv@Romans:10:7|), the only direct mention of the resurrection of Jesus in the Epistle, though implied often (1:3|, etc.). {That great shepherd of the sheep} (\ton poimena tn probatn ton megan\). This phrase occurs in strkjv@Isaiah:63:11| except \ton megan\ which the author adds as in strkjv@4:14; strkjv@10:21|. Songs:here, "the shepherd of the sheep the great one." {With the blood of the eternal covenant} (\en haimati diathks ainiou\). This language is from strkjv@Zechariah:9:11|. The language reminds us of Christ's own words in strkjv@Mark:14:24| (Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Luke:22:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:25|) about "my blood of the covenant."
rwp@Info_James @ THE EPISTLE OF JAMES BEFORE A.D. 50 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR He claims to be James, and so the book is not anonymous. It is either genuine or pseudonymous. He does not claim to be the brother of the Lord Jesus, as one might expect. James the brother of John was put to death by Herod Agrippa I about A.D. 44 (Acts:12:2|). But James the brother of Jesus (Galatians:1:19|) was still alive and became a leader of the church in Jerusalem (Acts:12:17|), presiding over the Conference in Jerusalem (Acts:15:13-21|) and apparently writing the message from the Conference to the Gentile churches (Acts:15:22-29|), and was still the leading elder in Jerusalem on Paul's last visit (Acts:21:18-25|). James does not claim here to be an apostle and he was not one of the twelve apostles, and the dispute about accepting it of which Eusebius spoke was about its apostolicity since James was only an apostle by implication (Galatians:1:19|) in the general sense of that term like Barnabas (Acts:14:14|), perhaps Silas and Timothy (1Thessalonians:2:7|), certainly not on a par with Paul, who claimed equality with the twelve. James, like the other brothers of Jesus, had once disbelieved his claims to be the Messiah (John:7:6f.|), but he was won by a special vision of the Risen Christ (1Corinthians:15:7|) and was in the upper room before the great pentecost (Acts:1:14|). It is plain that he had much to overcome as a zealous Jew to become a Christian, though he was not a mere cousin of Jesus or a son of Joseph by a former marriage. He was strictly the half-brother of Jesus, since Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. There is no reason to believe that he was a Nazirite. We know that he was married (1Corinthians:9:5|). He came to be called James the Just and was considered very devout. The Judaizers had counted on him to agree with them against Paul and Barnabas, but he boldly stood for Gentile freedom from the ceremonial law. The Judaizers still claimed him at Antioch and used his name wrongly to frighten Peter thereby (Galatians:2:12|). But to the end he remained the loyal friend to Paul and his gospel rightly understood (Acts:21:18-25|). Clement of Alexandria (_Hypot_. vii) says that, when he bore strong testimony to Jesus as the Son of man, they flung him down from the gable of the temple, stoned him, and beat him to death with a club. But Josephus (_Ant_. XX. ix. I) says that the Sadducees about A.D. 62 had James and some others brought before the Sanhedrin (Ananus presiding) and had them stoned as transgressors of the law. At any rate he won a martyr's crown like Stephen and James the brother of John.
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:1:19 @{Ye know this} (\iste\). Or "know this." Probably the perfect active indicative (literary form as in strkjv@Ephesians:5:5; strkjv@Hebrews:12:17|, unless both are imperative, while in strkjv@James:4:4| we have \oidate\, the usual vernacular _Koin_ perfect indicative). The imperative uses only \iste\ and only the context can decide which it is. \Esto\ (let be) is imperative. {Swift to hear} (\tachus eis to akousai\). For this use of \eis to\ with the infinitive after an adjective see strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:9|. For \eis to\ after adjectives see strkjv@Romans:16:19|. The picture points to listening to the word of truth (verse 18|) and is aimed against violent and disputatious speech (chapter strkjv@3:1-12|). The Greek moralists often urge a quick and attentive ear. {Slow to speak} (\bradus eis to lalsai\). Same construction and same ingressive aorist active infinitive, slow to begin speaking, not slow while speaking. {Slow to anger} (\bradus eis orgn\). He drops the infinitive here, but he probably means that slowness to speak up when angry will tend to curb the anger.
rwp@James:2:14 @{What doth it profit?} (\ti ophelos;\). Rhetorical question, almost of impatience. Old word from \ophell\, to increase, in N.T. only here, verse 16; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:32|. "\Ti ophelos\ was a common expression in the vivacious style of a moral diatribe" (Ropes). {If a man say} (\ean legi tis\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and the present active subjunctive of \leg\, "if one keep on saying." {He hath faith} (\pistin echein\). Infinitive in indirect assertion after \legi\. {But have not works} (\erga de m echi\). Third-class condition continued, "but keeps on not having (\m\ and present active subjunctive \echi\) works." It is the spurious claim to faith that James here condemns. {Can that faith save him?} (\m dunatai h pistis ssai auton;\). Negative answer expected (\m\). Effective aorist active infinitive \ssai\ (from \sz\). The article \h\ here is almost demonstrative in force as it is in origin, referring to the claim of faith without works just made.
rwp@James:2:19 @{Thou believest that God is one} (\su pisteueis hoti heis theos estin\). James goes on with his reply and takes up mere creed apart from works, belief that God exists (there is one God), a fundamental doctrine, but that is not belief or trust in God. It may be mere creed. {Thou doest well} (\kals poieis\). That is good as far as it goes, which is not far. {The demons also believe} (\kai ta daimonia pisteuousin\). They go that far (the same verb \pisteu\). They never doubt the fact of God's existence. {And shudder} (\kai phrissousin\). Present active indicative of \phriss\, old onomatopoetic verb to bristle up, to shudder, only here in N.T. Like Latin _horreo_ (horror, standing of the hair on end with terror). The demons do more than believe a fact. They shudder at it.
rwp@James:3:15 @{This wisdom} (\haut h sophia\). All talk and disproved by the life, counterfeit wisdom, not real wisdom (1:5; strkjv@3:17|). {Coming down from above} (\katerchomen anthen\). As in strkjv@1:5,17|. All true wisdom comes from God. {Earthly} (\epigeios\). Old adjective, on earth (\epi, g\), as in strkjv@John:3:12|, then with earthly limitations (Phillipians:3:19|), as here. {Sensual} (\psuchik\). Old adjective, belonging to the \psuch\, the sensuous or animal life (1Corinthians:2:14| and here). {Devilish} (\daimonids\). Late adjective from \daimonion\ (demon) and so demoniacal or demon-like, here only in N.T.
rwp@James:5:3 @{Are rusted} (\katitai\). Perfect passive indicative (singular for \chrusos\ and \arguros\ are grouped as one) of \katio\, late verb (from \ios\, rust) with perfective sense of \kata\, to rust through (down to the bottom), found only here, Sir. strkjv@12:11, Epictetus (_Diss_. 4, 6, 14). {Rust} (\ios\). Poison in strkjv@James:3:8; strkjv@Romans:3:13| (only N.T. examples of old word). Silver does corrode and gold will tarnish. Dioscorides (V.91) tells about gold being rusted by chemicals. Modern chemists can even transmute metals as the alchemists claimed. {For a testimony} (\eis marturion\). Common idiom as in strkjv@Matthew:8:4| (use of \eis\ with accusative in predicate). {Against you} (\humin\). Dative of disadvantage as in strkjv@Mark:6:11| (\eis marturion autois\) where in the parallel passage (Luke:9:5|) we have \eis marturion ep' autous\. "To you" will make sense, as in strkjv@Matthew:8:4; strkjv@10:18|, but "against" is the idea here as in strkjv@Luke:21:13|. {Shall eat} (\phagetai\). Future middle (late form from \ephagon\) of defective verb \esthi\, to eat. {Your flesh} (\tas sarkas\). The plural is used for the fleshy parts of the body like pieces of flesh (Revelation:17:16; strkjv@19:18,21|). Rust eats like a canker, like cancer in the body. {As fire} (\hs pur\). Editors differ here whether to connect this phrase with \phagetai\, just before (as Mayor), for fire eats up more rapidly than rust, or with the following, as Westcott and Hort and Ropes, that is the eternal fire of Gehenna which awaits them (Matthew:25:41; strkjv@Mark:9:44|). This interpretation makes a more vivid picture for \ethsaurisate\ (ye have laid up, first aorist active indicative of \thsauriz\, strkjv@Matthew:6:19| and see strkjv@Proverbs:16:27|), but it is more natural to take it with \phagetai\.
rwp@Info_John @ THE BELOVED DISCIPLE The book claims to be written by "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (John:21:20|) who is pointedly identified by a group of believers (apparently in Ephesus) as the writer: "This is the disciple which beareth witness of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his witness is true" (John:21:24|). This is the first criticism of the Fourth Gospel of which we have any record, made at the time when the book was first sent forth, made in a postscript to the epilogue or appendix. Possibly the book closed first with strkjv@John:20:31|, but chapter 21 is in precisely the same style and was probably added before publication by the author. The natural and obvious meaning of the language in strkjv@John:21:24| is that the Beloved Disciple wrote the whole book. He is apparently still alive when this testimony to his authorship is given. There are scholars who interpret it to mean that the Beloved Disciple is responsible for the facts in the book and not the actual writer, but that is a manifest straining of the language. There is in this verse no provision made for a redactor as distinct from the witness as is plausibly set forth by Dr. A. E. Garvie in _The Beloved Disciple_ (1922).
rwp@Info_John @ A PERSONAL WITNESS It is manifest all through the book that the writer is the witness who is making the contribution of his personal knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ during his earthly ministry. In strkjv@John:1:14| he plainly says that "the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory" (\etheasametha tn doxan autou\). He here associates others with him in this witness to the glory of the Word, but in strkjv@John:21:25| he employs the singular "I suppose" (\oimai\) in sharp dis- tinction from the plural "we know" (\oidamen\) just before. The writer is present in nearly all the scenes described. The word witness (\marture, marturia\) so common in this Gospel (John:1:7,8,19; strkjv@3:11,26,33; strkjv@5:31; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@21:24|, etc.) illustrates well this point of view. In the Gospel of Luke we have the work of one who was not a personal witness of Christ (Luke:1:1-4|). In the Gospel of Matthew we possess either the whole work of a personal follower and apostle or at least the Logia of Matthew according to Papias preserved in it. In Mark's Gospel we have as the basis the preaching of Simon Peter as preserved by his interpreter John Mark. John's Gospel claims to be the personal witness of "the disciple whom Jesus loved" and as such deserves and has received exceptional esteem. One may note all through the book evidences of an eye-witness in the vivid details.
rwp@Info_John @ THE AUTHOR THE APOSTLE JOHN Loisy (_Leviticus:Quatr. Evangile_, p. 132) says that if one takes literally what is given in the body of the Gospel of the Beloved Disciple he is bound to be one of the twelve. Loisy does not take it "literally." But why not? Are we to assume that the author of this greatest of books is playing a part or using a deliberate artifice to deceive? It may be asked why John does not use his own name instead of a _nom de plume_. Reference can be made to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, no one of which gives the author's name. One can see a reason for the turn here given since the book consists so largely of personal experiences of the author with Christ. He thus avoids the too frequent use of the personal pronoun and preserves the element of witness which marks the whole book. One by one the other twelve apostles disappear if we test their claims for the authorship. In the list of seven in chapter strkjv@John:21| it is easy to drop the names of Simon Peter, Thomas, and Nathanael. There are left two unnamed disciples and the sons of Zebedee (here alone mentioned, not even named, in the book). John in this Gospel always means the Baptist. Why does the author so uniformly slight the sons of Zebedee if not one of them himself? In the Acts Luke does not mention his own name nor that of Titus his brother, though so many other friends of Paul are named. If the Beloved Disciple is John the Apostle, the silence about James and himself is easily understood. James is ruled out because of his early death (Acts:12:1|). The evidence in the Gospel points directly to the Apostle John as the author.
rwp@Info_John @ HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL It is just here that the chief attack is made on the Fourth Gospel even by some who admit the Johannine authorship. It is now assumed by some that the Fourth Gospel is not on a par with the Synoptics in historical reliability and some harmonies omit it entirely or place it separately at the close, though certainly Tatian used it with the Synoptics in his _Diatessaron_, the first harmony of the Gospels. Some even follow Schmiedel in seeing only a symbolic or parabolic character in the miracles in the Fourth Gospel, particularly in the narrative of the raising of Lazarus in chapter strkjv@John:11| which occurs here alone. But John makes this miracle play quite an important part in the culmination of events at the end. Clearly the author professes to be giving actual data largely out of his own experience and knowledge. It is objected by some that the Fourth Gospel gives an unnatural picture of Christ with Messianic claims at the very start. But the Synoptics give that same claim at the baptism and temptation, not to mention Luke's account of the Boy Jesus in the temple. The picture of the Jews as hostile to Jesus is said to be overdrawn in the Fourth Gospel. The answer to that appears in the Sermon on the Mount, the Sabbath miracles, the efforts of the Pharisees and lawyers to catch Jesus in his talk, the final denunciation in strkjv@Matthew:23|, all in the Synoptics. The opposition to Jesus grew steadily as he revealed himself more clearly. Some of the difficulties raised are gratuitous as in the early cleansing of the temple as if it could not have happened twice, confounding the draught of fishes in chapter strkjv@John:21| with that in strkjv@Luke:5|, making Mary of Bethany at the feast of a Simon in chapter strkjv@John:12| the same as the sinful woman at the feast of another Simon in strkjv@Luke:7|, making John's Gospel locate the last passover meal a day ahead instead of at the regular time as the Synoptics have it. Rightly interpreted these difficulties disappear. In simple truth, if one takes the Fourth Gospel at its face value, the personal recollections of the aged John phrased in his own way to supplement the narratives in the Synoptics, there is little left to give serious trouble. The Jerusalem ministry with the feasts is a case in point. The narrative of the call of the first disciples in chapter strkjv@John:1| is another. The author followed Simon in bringing also his own brother James to Jesus. John was present in the appearance of Christ before Annas, and Pilate. He was at the Cross when no other apostles were there. He took the mother of Jesus to his home and then returned to the Cross. He saw the piercing of the side of Jesus. He knew and saw the deed of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. E. H. Askwith has a most helpful discussion of this whole problem in _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910).
rwp@Info_John @ BUT DIFFERENT FROM THE APOCALYPSE It should be said at once that the Johannine authorship of the Fourth Gospel does not depend on that of the Apocalypse. In fact, some men hold to the Johannine authorship of the Apocalypse who deny that of the Gospel while some hold directly the opposite view. Some deny the Johannine authorship of both Gospel and Apocalypse, while the majority hold to the Johannine authorship of Gospel, Epistles, and Apocalypse as was the general rule till after the time of Origen. The author of the Apocalypse claims to be John (Revelation:1:4,9; strkjv@22:8|), though what John he does not say. Denial of the existence of a "Presbyter John" naturally leads one to think of the Apostle John. Origen says that John, the brother of James, was banished to the Isle of Patmos where he saw the Apocalypse. There is undoubted radical difference in language between the Apocalypse and the other Johannine books which will receive discussion when the Apocalypse is reached. Westcott explained these differences as due to the early date of the Apocalypse in the reign of Vespasian before John had become master of the Greek language. Even J. H. Moulton (_Prolegomena_, p. 9, note 4) says bluntly: "If its date was 95 A.D., the author cannot have written the fourth Gospel only a short time after." Or before, he would say. But the date of the Apocalypse seems definitely to belong to the reign of Domitian. Songs:one ventures to call attention to the statement in strkjv@Acts:4:13| where Peter and John are described as \agrammatoi kai iditai\ (unlettered and private or unschooled men). It is curious also that it is precisely in 2Peter and the Apocalypse that we have so many grammatical solecisms and peculiarities. We know that the Fourth Gospel was reviewed by a group of John's friends in Ephesus, while he was apparently alone in the Isle of Patmos. The excitement of the visions would naturally increase the uncouth vernacular of the Apocalypse so much like that in the Greek papyri as seen in Milligan's _Greek Papyri_, for instance. This being true, one is able, in spite of Moulton's dictum, to hold to the Johannine authorship of both Gospel and Apocalypse and not far apart in date.
rwp@John:1:4 @{In him was life} (\en auti z n\). That which has come into being (verse 3|) in the Logos was life. The power that creates and sustains life in the universe is the Logos. This is what Paul means by the perfect passive verb \ektistai\ (stands created) in strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. This is also the claim of Jesus to Martha (John:11:25|). This is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:1:3| "bearing (upholding) the all things by the word of his power." Once this language might have been termed unscientific, but not so now after the spiritual interpretation of the physical world by Eddington and Jeans. Usually in John \z\ means spiritual life, but here the term is unlimited and includes all life; only it is not \bios\ (manner of life), but the very principle or essence of life. That is spiritual behind the physical and to this great scientists today agree. It is also personal intelligence and power. Some of the western documents have \estin\ here instead of \n\ to bring out clearly the timelessness of this phrase of the work of the \Logos\. {And the life was the light of men} (\kai h z n to phs tn anthrpn\). Here the article with both \z\ and \phs\ makes them interchangeable. "The light was the life of men" is also true. That statement is curiously like the view of some physicists who find in electricity (both light and power) the nearest equivalent to life in its ultimate physical form. Later Jesus will call himself the light of the world (John:8:12|). John is fond of these words life and light in Gospel, Epistles, Revelation. He here combines them to picture his conception of the Pre-incarnate Logos in his relation to the race. He was and is the Life of men (\tn anthrpon\, generic use of the article) and the Light of men. John asserts this relation of the Logos to the race of men in particular before the Incarnation.
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:1:15 @{Beareth witness} (\marturei\). Historical (dramatic) present indicative of this characteristic word in John (cf. strkjv@1:17f.|). See strkjv@1:32,34| for historical examples of John's witness to Christ. This sentence is a parenthesis in Westcott and Hort's text, though the Revised Version makes a parenthesis of most of verse 14|. The witness of John is adduced in proof of the glory full of grace and truth already claimed for the Incarnate Logos. {Crieth} (\kekragen\). Second perfect active indicative of \kraz\, old verb for loud crying, repeated in dramatic form again for emphasis recalling the wonderful Voice in the wilderness which the Beloved Disciple can still hear echoing through the years. {This was} (\houtos n\). Imperfect indicative where John throws the tense back in past time when he looked forward to the coming of the Messiah as in strkjv@Acts:3:10| where we should prefer "is" (\estin\). Gildersleeve (_Syntax_, p. 96) calls this the "imperfect of sudden appreciation of the real state of things." {Of whom I said} (\hon eipon\). But B C and a corrector of Aleph (Westcott and Hort) have \ho eipn\ "the one who said," a parenthetical explanation about the Baptist, not the words of the Baptist about Christ. {After me} (\opis mou\). See also strkjv@1:27|. Later in time John means. He described "the Coming One" (\ho erchomenos\) before he saw Jesus. The language of John here is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:3:11| \ho opis mou erchomenos\ (cf. strkjv@Mark:1:7|). The Beloved Disciple had heard the Baptist say these very words, but he also had the Synoptic Gospels. {Is become} (\gegonen\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. It is already an actual fact when the Baptist is speaking. {Before me} (\emprosthen mou\). In rank and dignity, the Baptist means, \ho ischuroteros mou\ "the one mightier than I" (Mark:1:7|) and \ischuroteros mou\ "mightier than I" (Matthew:3:11|). In strkjv@John:3:28| \emprosthen ekeinou\ (before him, the Christ) does mean priority in time, but not here. This superior dignity of the Messiah John proudly recognizes always (John:3:25-30|). {For he was before me} (\hoti prtos mou n\). Paradox, but clear. He had always been (\n imperfect\) before John in his Pre-incarnate state, but "after" John in time of the Incarnation, but always ahead of John in rank immediately on his Incarnation. \Prtos mou\ (superlative with ablative) occurs here when only two are compared as is common in the vernacular _Koin_. Songs:the Beloved Disciple came first (\prtos\) to the tomb, ahead of Peter (20:4|). Songs:also \prton humn\ in strkjv@15:18| means "before you" as if it were \proteron humn\. Verse 30| repeats these words almost exactly.
rwp@John:1:18 @{No man hath seen God at any time} (\theon oudeis heraken ppote\). "God no one has ever seen." Perfect active indicative of \hora\. Seen with the human physical eye, John means. God is invisible (Exodus:33:20; strkjv@Deuteronomy:4:12|). Paul calls God \aoratos\ (Colossians:1:15; strkjv@1Timothy:1:17|). John repeats the idea in strkjv@John:5:37; strkjv@6:46|. And yet in strkjv@14:7| Jesus claims that the one who sees him has seen the Father as here. {The only begotten Son} (\ho monogens huios\). This is the reading of the Textus Receptus and is intelligible after \hs monogenous para patros\ in verse 14|. But the best old Greek manuscripts (Aleph B C L) read \monogens theos\ (God only begotten) which is undoubtedly the true text. Probably some scribe changed it to \ho monogens huios\ to obviate the blunt statement of the deity of Christ and to make it like strkjv@3:16|. But there is an inner harmony in the reading of the old uncials. The Logos is plainly called \theos\ in verse 1|. The Incarnation is stated in verse 14|, where he is also termed \monogens\. He was that before the Incarnation. Songs:he is "God only begotten," "the Eternal Generation of the Son" of Origen's phrase. {Which is in the bosom of the Father} (\ho n eis ton kolpon tou patros\). The eternal relation of the Son with the Father like \pros ton theon\ in verse 1|. In strkjv@3:13| there is some evidence for \ho n en ti ourani\ used by Christ of himself while still on earth. The mystic sense here is that the Son is qualified to reveal the Father as Logos (both the Father in Idea and Expression) by reason of the continual fellowship with the Father. {He} (\ekinos\). Emphatic pronoun referring to the Son. {Hath declared him} (\exgsato\). First aorist (effective) middle indicative of \exgeomai\, old verb to lead out, to draw out in narrative, to recount. Here only in John, though once in Luke's Gospel (24:35|) and four times in Acts:(10:8; strkjv@15:12,14; strkjv@21:19|). This word fitly closes the Prologue in which the Logos is pictured in marvellous fashion as the Word of God in human flesh, the Son of God with the Glory of God in him, showing men who God is and what he is.
rwp@John:1:19 @{And this is the witness of John} (\kai haut estin h marturia tou Ianou\). He had twice already alluded to it (verses 7f., 15|) and now he proceeds to give it as the most important item to add after the Prologue. Just as the author assumes the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke, so he assumes the Synoptic accounts of the baptism of Jesus by John, but adds various details of great interest and value between the baptism and the Galilean ministry, filling out thus our knowledge of this first year of the Lord's ministry in various parts of Palestine. The story in John proceeds along the same lines as in the Synoptics. There is increasing unfolding of Christ to the disciples with increasing hostility on the part of the Jews till the final consummation in Jerusalem. {When the Jews sent unto him} (\hote apesteilan pros auton hoi Ioudaioi\). John, writing in Ephesus near the close of the first century long after the destruction of Jerusalem, constantly uses the phrase "the Jews" as descriptive of the people as distinct from the Gentile world and from the followers of Christ (at first Jews also). Often he uses it of the Jewish leaders and rulers in particular who soon took a hostile attitude toward both John and Jesus. Here it is the Jews from Jerusalem who sent (\apesteilan\, first aorist active indicative of \apostell\). {Priests and Levites} (\hiereis kai Leueitas\). Sadducees these were. Down below in verse 24| the author explains that it was the Pharisees who sent the Sadducees. The Synoptics throw a flood of light on this circumstance, for in strkjv@Matthew:3:7| we are told that the Baptist called the Pharisees and Sadducees "offspring of vipers" (Luke:3:7|). Popular interest in John grew till people were wondering "in their hearts concerning John whether haply he were the Christ" (Luke:3:15|). Songs:the Sanhedrin finally sent a committee to John to get his own view of himself, but the Pharisees saw to it that Sadducees were sent. {To ask him} (\hina ertssin auton\). Final \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \erta\, old verb to ask a question as here and often in the _Koin_ to ask for something (John:14:16|) like \aite\. {Who art thou?} (\su tis ei;\). Direct question preserved and note proleptic position of \su\, "Thou, who art thou?" The committee from the Sanhedrin put the question sharply up to John to define his claims concerning the Messiah.
rwp@John:1:25 @{Why then baptizest thou?} (\Ti oun baptizeis;\). In view of his repeated denials (three here mentioned). {If thou art not} (\ei su ouk ei\). Condition of first class. They did not interpret his claim to be "the voice" to be important enough to justify the ordinance of baptism. Abrahams (_Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels_) shows that proselyte baptism was probably practised before John's time, but its use by John was treating the Jews as if they were themselves Gentiles.
rwp@John:1:49 @{Thou art the Son of God} (\su ei ho huios tou theou\). Whether Nathanael had heard the Baptist say this of Jesus (1:34|) we do not know, apparently not, but Nathanael was a student of the Old Testament as Philip implied (1:45|) and was quick to put together his knowledge, the statement of Philip, and the manifest supernatural knowledge of Jesus as just shown. There is no reason for toning down the noble confession of Nathanael in the light of Christ's claim in verse 51|. Cf. the confession of Peter in strkjv@6:69; strkjv@Matthew:16:16| and Martha's in strkjv@John:11:27|. Nathanael goes further. {Thou art King of Israel} (\Basileus ei tou Isral\). To us this seems an anti-climax, but not so to Nathanael for both are Messianic titles in strkjv@Psalms:2| and Jesus is greeted in the Triumphal Entry as the King of Israel (John:12:13|).
rwp@John:1:51 @{Verily, Verily} (\Amn, amn\). Hebrew word transliterated into Greek and then into English, our "amen." John always repeats it, not singly as in the Synoptics, and only in the words of Jesus, an illustration of Christ's authoritative manner of speaking as shown also by \leg humin\ (I say unto you). Note plural \humin\ though \auti\ just before is singular (to him). Jesus addresses thus others besides Nathanael. {The heaven opened} (\ton ouranon aneigota\). Second perfect active participle of \anoig\ with double reduplication, standing open. The words remind one of what took place at the baptism of Jesus (Matthew:3:16; strkjv@Luke:3:21|), but the immediate reference is to the opened heaven as the symbol of free intercourse between God and man (Isaiah:64:1|) and as it was later illustrated in the death of Stephen (Acts:7:56|). There is a quotation from strkjv@Genesis:28:12f.|, Jacob's vision at Bethel. That was a dream to Jacob, but Christ is himself the bond of fellowship between heaven and earth, between God and man, for Jesus is both "the Son of God" as Nathanael said and "the Son of Man" (\epi ton huion tou anthrpou\) as Jesus here calls himself. God and man meet in Christ. He is the true Jacob's Ladder. "I am the Way," Jesus will say. He is more than King of Israel, he is the Son of Man (the race). Songs:quickly has this Gospel brought out in the witness of the Baptist, the faith of the first disciples, the claims of Jesus Christ, the fully developed picture of the Logos who is both God and man, moving among men and winning them to his service. At the close of the ministry Christ will tell Caiaphas that he will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven (Mark:14:62|). Here at the start Jesus is conscious of the final culmination and in apocalyptic eschatological language that we do not fully understand he sets forth the dignity and majesty of his Person.
rwp@John:2:16 @{Take these things hence} (\Arate tauta enteuthen\). First aorist active imperative of \air\. Probably the doves were in baskets or cages and so had to be taken out by the traders. {Make not my Father's house a house of merchandise} (\m poieite ton oikon tou patros mou oikon emporiou\). "Stop making," it means, \m\ and the present active imperative. They had made it a market-house (\emporiou\, here only in N.T., old word from \emporos\, merchant, one who goes on a journey for traffic, a drummer). Note the clear-cut Messianic claim here (My Father as in strkjv@Luke:2:49|). Jerome says: "A certain fiery and starry light shone from his eyes and the majesty of Godhead gleamed in His face."
rwp@John:3:19 @{And this is the judgment} (\haut de estin h krisis\). A thoroughly Johannine phrase for sequence of thought (15:12; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:1:5; strkjv@5:11,14; strkjv@3John:1:6|). It is more precisely the process of judging (\kri-sis\) rather than the result (\kri-ma\) of the judgment. "It is no arbitrary sentence, but the working out of a moral law" (Bernard). {The light is come} (\to phs elluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\, a permanent result as already explained in the Prologue concerning the Incarnation (1:4,5,9,11|). Jesus is the Light of the world. {Loved darkness} (\gapsan to skotos\). Job:(Job:24:13|) spoke of men rebelling against the light. Here \to skotos\, common word for moral and spiritual darkness (1Thessalonians:5:5|), though \h skotia\ in strkjv@John:1:5|. "Darkness" is common in John as a metaphor for the state of sinners (8:12; strkjv@12:35, 46; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@2:8,9,11|). Jesus himself is the only moral and spiritual light of the world (8:12|) as he dared claim to his enemies. The pathos of it all is that men fall in love with the darkness of sin and rebel against the light like denizens of the underworld, "for their works were evil (\ponra\)." When the light appears, they scatter to their holes and dens. \Ponros\ (from \ponos\, toil, \pone\, to toil) is used of the deeds of the world by Jesus (7:7|). In the end the god of this world blinds men's eyes so that they do not see the light (2Corinthians:4:4|). The fish in the Mammoth Cave have no longer eyes, but only sockets where eyes used to be. The evil one has a powerful grip on the world (1John:5:19|).
rwp@John:3:21 @{That doeth the truth} (\ho poin tn altheian\). See strkjv@1John:1:6| for this striking phrase. {Comes to the light} (\erchetai pros to phs\). Is drawn by the light, spiritual heliotropes, not driven from it. {That may be made manifest} (\hina phanerthi\). Final \hina\ with first aorist passive subjunctive of \phanero\. {They have been wrought in God} (\en thei estin eirgasmena\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \ergazomai\. He does not claim that they are perfect, only that they have been wrought in the sphere of and in the power of God. Hence he wants the light turned on.
rwp@John:3:23 @{John was also baptizing} (\n de kai ho Ians baptizn\). Periphrastic imperfect picturing the continued activity of the Baptist simultaneous with the growing work of Jesus. There was no real rivalry except in people's minds. {In Aenon near to Salim} (\en Ainn eggus tou Saleim\). It is not clearly known where this place was. Eusebius locates it in the Jordan valley south of Beisan west of the river where are many springs (fountains, eyes). There is a place called Salim east of Shechem in Samaria with a village called 'Aimen, but with no water there. There may have been water there then, of course. {Because there was much water there} (\hoti hudata polla n ekei\). "Because many waters were there." Not for drinking, but for baptizing. "Therefore even in summer baptism by immersion could be continued" (Marcus Dods). {And they came, and were baptized} (\kai pareginonto kai ebaptizonto\). Imperfects both, one middle and the other passive, graphically picturing the long procession of pilgrims who came to John confessing their sins and receiving baptism at his hands.
rwp@John:3:35 @{Hath given all things into his hand} (\panta dedken en ti cheiri autou\). John makes the same statement about Jesus in strkjv@13:3| (using \eis tas cheiras\ instead of \en ti cheiri\). Jesus makes the same claim in strkjv@5:19-30; strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@28:18|.
rwp@John:4:2 @{Although Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples} (\kaitoige Isous autos ouk ebaptizen all' hoi mathtai autou\). Parenthetical explanation that applies also to strkjv@3:22|. Imperfect tense means that it was not the habit of Jesus. This is the only N.T. instance of \kaitoige\ (and yet indeed), compound conjunction (\kaitoi\ in strkjv@Acts:14:17; strkjv@Hebrews:4:3|) with intensive particle \ge\ added. This is the last mention of baptism under the direction of Jesus till the Great Commission (Matthew:28:19|). It is possible that Jesus stopped the baptizing because of the excitement and the issue raised about his Messianic claims till after his resurrection when he enjoined it upon his disciples as a rite of public enlistment in his service.
rwp@John:4:25 @{Messiah cometh} (\Messias erchetai\). Hebrew word in N.T. only here and strkjv@1:41| and explained by \Christos\ in both places. The Samaritans looked for a Messiah, a prophet like Moses (Deuteronomy:18:18|). Simon Magus gave himself out in Samaria as some great one and had a large following (Acts:8:9|). Pilate quelled an uprising in Samaria over a fanatical Messianic claimant (Josephus, _Ant_. XVIII. iv. 1). {When he is come} (\hotan elthi ekeinos\). "Whenever that one comes." Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ (\hote\, \an\) and the second aorist active subjunctive. Wistfully she turns to this dim hope as a bare possibility about this strange "prophet." {He will declare unto us all things} (\anaggelei hmin hapanta\). Future active indicative of \anaggell\, old and common verb to announce fully (\ana\, up and down). See also strkjv@16:13|. Perhaps here is light on the knowledge of her life by Jesus as well as about the way to worship God.
rwp@John:5:18 @{Sought the more} (\mallon eztoun\). Imperfect active of \zte\, graphic picture of increased and untiring effort "to kill him" (\auton apokteinai\, first aorist active, to kill him off and be done with him). John repeats this clause "they sought to kill him" in strkjv@7:1,19,25; strkjv@8:37,40|. Their own blood was up on this Sabbath issue and they bend every energy to put Jesus to death. If this is a passover, this bitter anger, murderous wrath, will go on and grow for two years. {Not only brake the Sabbath} (\ou monon elue to sabbaton\). Imperfect active of \lu\. He was now a common and regular Sabbath-breaker. \Lu\ means to loosen, to set at naught. The papyri give examples of \lu\ in this sense like \luein ta penth\ (to break the period of mourning). This was the first grudge against Jesus, but his defence had made the offence worse and had given them a far graver charge. {But also called God his own Father} (\alla kai patera idion elege ton theon\). "His own" (\idion\) in a sense not true of others. That is precisely what Jesus meant by "My Father." See strkjv@Romans:8:32| for \ho idios huios\, "his own Son." {Making himself equal with God} (\ison heauton poin ti thei\). \Isos\ is an old common adjective (in papyri also) and means {equal}. In strkjv@Phillipians:2:6| Paul calls the Pre-incarnate Christ \isa thei\, "equal to God" (plural \isa\, attributes of God). Bernard thinks that Jesus would not claim to be \isos thei\ because in strkjv@John:14:28| he says: "The Father is greater than I." And yet he says in strkjv@14:7| that the one who sees him sees in him the Father. Certainly the Jews understood Jesus to claim equality with the Father in nature and privilege and power as also in strkjv@10:33; strkjv@19:7|. Besides, if the Jews misunderstood Jesus on this point, it was open and easy for him to deny it and to clear up the misapprehension. This is precisely what he does not do. On the contrary Jesus gives a powerful apologetic in defence of his claim to equality with the Father (verses 19-47|).
rwp@John:5:19 @{The Son} (\ho huios\). The absolute use of the Son in relation to the Father admitting the charge in verse 18| and defending his equality with the Father. {Can do nothing by himself} (\ou dunatai poiein aph'heautou ouden\). True in a sense of every man, but in a much deeper sense of Christ because of the intimate relation between him and the Father. See this same point in strkjv@5:30; strkjv@7:28; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@14:10|. Jesus had already made it in strkjv@5:17|. Now he repeats and defends it. {But what he seeth the Father doing} (\an m ti blepi ton patera poiounta\). Rather, "unless he sees the Father doing something." Negative condition (\an m\=\ean m\, if not, unless) of third class with present (habit) subjunctive (\blepi\) and present active participle (\poiounta\). It is a supreme example of a son copying the spirit and work of a father. In his work on earth the Son sees continually what the Father is doing. In healing this poor man he was doing what the Father wishes him to do. {For what things soever he doeth, these the Son also doeth in like manner} (\ha gar an ekeinos poii tauta kai ho huios homois poiei\). Indefinite relative clause with \an\ and the present active subjunctive (\poii\). Note \ekeinos\, emphatic demonstrative, that one, referring to the Father. This sublime claim on the part of Jesus will exasperate his enemies still more.
rwp@John:5:21 @{Quickeneth whom he will} (\hous thelei zopoiei\). Present active indicative of \zopoie\ (from \zopoios\, making alive), common in Paul (1Corinthians:15:45|, etc.). As yet, so far as we know, Jesus had not raised the dead, but he claims the power to do it on a par with the power of the Father. The raising of the son of the widow of Nain (Luke:7:11-17|) is not far ahead, followed by the message to the Baptist which speaks of this same power (Luke:7:22; strkjv@Matthew:11:5|), and the raising of Jairus' daughter (Matthew:9:18,22-26|). Jesus exercises this power on those "whom he wills." Christ has power to quicken both body and soul.
rwp@John:5:22 @{He hath given all judgement unto the Son} (\tn krisin psan dedken ti huii\). Perfect active indicative of \didmi\, state of completion (as in strkjv@3:35; strkjv@6:27,29; strkjv@10:29|, etc.). See this prerogative claimed for Christ already in strkjv@3:17|. See the picture of Christ as Judge of men in strkjv@Matthew:25:31-46|.
rwp@John:5:23 @{That all may honour the Son} (\hina pantes timsin ton huion\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \tima\ (may keep on honouring the Son). {He that honoureth not the Son} (\ho m timn ton huion\). Articular present active participle of \tima\ with negative \m\. Jesus claims here the same right to worship from men that the Father has. Dishonouring Jesus is dishonouring the Father who sent him (8:49; strkjv@12:26; strkjv@15:23; strkjv@1John:2:23|). See also strkjv@Luke:10:16|. There is small comfort here for those who praise Jesus as teacher and yet deny his claims to worship. The Gospel of John carries this high place for Christ throughout, but so do the other Gospels (even Q, the Logia of Jesus) and the rest of the New Testament.
rwp@John:6:31 @{Ate the manna} (\to manna ephagon\). The rabbis quoted strkjv@Psalms:72:16| to prove that the Messiah, when he comes, will outdo Moses with manna from heaven. Jesus was claiming to be the Messiah and able to give bread for eternal life (verse 27|). Lightfoot (_Biblical Essays_, p. 152) says: "The key to the understanding of the whole situation is an acquaintance with the national expectation of the greater Moses." They quote to Jesus strkjv@Exodus:16:15| (of. strkjv@Numbers:11:7; strkjv@21:5; strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:3|). Their plea is that Moses gave us bread "from heaven" (\ek tou ouranou\). Can Jesus equal that deed of Moses?
rwp@John:6:32 @{It was not Moses that gave you} (\ou Muss edken humin\). "Not Moses gave you." Blunt and pointed denial (aorist active indicative of \didmi\) that Moses was the giver of the bread from heaven (the manna). Moses was not superior to Christ on this score. {But my Father} (\all ho patr mou\). Not "our Father," but same claim as in strkjv@5:17f|. Which caused so much anger in Jerusalem. {Gives} (\didsin\). Present active indicative, not aorist (\edken\). Continual process. {The true bread out of heaven} (\ton arton ek tou ouranou ton althinon\). "The bread out of heaven" as the manna and more "the genuine bread" of which that was merely a type. On \althinos\ see strkjv@1:9; strkjv@4:23|.
rwp@John:6:42 @{How doth he now say?} (\Ps nun legei;\). They knew Jesus as the son of Joseph and Mary. They cannot comprehend his claim to be from heaven. This lofty claim puzzles sceptics today.
rwp@John:6:51 @{The living bread} (\ho artos ho zn\). "The bread the living." Repetition of the claim in 35,41,48|, but with a slight change from \zs\ to \zn\ (present active participle of \za\). It is alive and can give life. See strkjv@4:10| for living water. In strkjv@Revelation:1:17| Jesus calls himself the Living One (\ho zn\). {For ever} (\eis ton aina\). Eternally like \ainion\ with \zn\ in 47|. {I shall give} (\eg ds\). Emphasis on \eg\ (I). Superior so to Moses. {Is my flesh} (\h sarx mou estin\). See on ¯1:14| for \sarx\ the Incarnation. This new idea creates far more difficulty to the hearers who cannot grasp Christ's idea of self-sacrifice. {For the life of the world} (\huper ts tou kosmou zs\). Over, in behalf of, \huper\ means, and in some connexions instead of as in strkjv@11:50|. See strkjv@1:30| for the Baptist's picture of Christ as the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. See also strkjv@3:17; strkjv@4:42; strkjv@1John:3:16; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@Galatians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.; strkjv@Romans:5:8|. Jesus has here presented to this Galilean multitude the central fact of his atoning death for the spiritual life of the world.
rwp@John:7:6 @{My time is not yet come} (\ho kairos ho emos oup parestin\). Only use with verse 8| of \kairos\ in this Gospel, elsewhere \chronos\ (John:5:6|) or more often \hra\ (2:4|) "the predestined hour" (Bernard). Here \kairos\ is the fitting or proper occasion for Christ's manifesting himself publicly to the authorities as Messiah as in verse 8|. At the feast of tabernacles Jesus did make such public claims (7:29,33; strkjv@8:12,28,38,42,58|). \Parestin\ is present active indicative of \pareimi\, old compound, to be by, to be present. The brothers of Jesus had the regular Jewish obligation to go up to the feast, but the precise day was a matter of indifference to them.
rwp@John:7:16 @{Mine} (\em\). Possessive pronoun, "not mine in origin." Jesus denies that he is self-taught, though not a schoolman. {But his that sent me} (\alla tou pempsantos me\). Genitive case of the articular participle (first aorist active of \pemp\). His teaching is not self-originated nor is it the product of the schools (see the Talmud in contrast with the New Testament). Jesus often in John uses this idiom of "the one who sent me" of the Father (4:34; strkjv@5:23,24,30,37; strkjv@6:38-40,44; strkjv@7:16,18,28|, etc.). The bold claim is here made by Jesus that his teaching is superior in character and source to that of the rabbis.
rwp@John:7:17 @{If any man willeth to do} (\ean tis theli poiein\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and present active subjunctive \theli\ not used as a mere auxiliary verb for the future "will do," but with full force of \thel\, to will, to wish. See the same use of \thel\ in strkjv@5:40| "and yet ye are not willing to come" (\kai ou thelete elthein\). {He shall know} (\gnsetai\). Future middle indicative of \ginsk\. Experimental knowledge from willingness to do God's will. See this same point by Jesus in strkjv@5:46; strkjv@18:37|. There must be moral harmony between man's purpose and God's will. "If there be no sympathy there can be no understanding" (Westcott). Atheists of all types have no point of contact for approach to the knowledge of Christ. This fact does not prove the non-existence of God, but simply their own isolation. They are out of tune with the Infinite. For those who love God it is also true that obedience to God's will brings richer knowledge of God. Agnostic and atheistic critics are disqualified by Jesus as witnesses to his claims. {Of God} (\ek tou theou\). Out of God as source. {From myself} (\ap' emautou\). Instead of from God.
rwp@John:7:18 @{From himself} (\aph' heautou\). This kind of teacher is self-taught, pushes his own ideas, presses his own claims for position and glory, "blows his own horn" as we say. Jesus is the other type of teacher, seeks the glory of the one who sent him, whose herald and ambassador he is. {The same} (\houtos\). "This one." {Unrighteousness} (\adikia\). Old word from \adikos\ (\a\ privative and \dik\). Here in contrast with "true" (\alths\). See strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:10; strkjv@1Corinthians:13:6| for the deceit of unrighteousness in contrast with truth as here.
rwp@John:7:20 @{The multitude} (\ho ochlos\). Outside of Jerusalem (the Galilean crowd as in verses 11f.|) and so unfamiliar with the effort to kill Jesus recorded in strkjv@5:18|. It is important in this chapter to distinguish clearly the several groups like the Jewish leaders (7:13,15,25,26,30,32|, etc.), the multitude from Galilee and elsewhere (10-13,20,31,40,49|), the common people of Jerusalem (25|), the Roman soldiers (45f.|). {Thou hast a devil} (\daimonion echeis\). "Demon," of course, as always in the Gospels. These pilgrims make the same charge against Jesus made long ago by the Pharisees in Jerusalem in explanation of the difference between John and Jesus (Matthew:11:18; strkjv@Luke:7:33|). It is an easy way to make a fling like that. "He is a monomaniac labouring under a hallucination that people wish to kill him" (Dods).
rwp@John:7:28 @{And I am not come of myself} (\kai ap' emautou ouk ellutha\). \Kai\ here="and yet." Jesus repeats the claim of verse 17| and also in strkjv@5:30; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@12:49; strkjv@14:10|. {Whom ye know not} (\hon humeis ouk oidate\). Jesus passes by a controversy over the piece of popular theology to point out their ignorance of God the Father who sent him. He tersely agrees that they know something of him. Jesus says of these Jews that they know not God as in strkjv@8:19,55|.
rwp@John:7:29 @{I know him} (\eg oida auton\). In contrast to the ignorance of these people. See the same words in strkjv@8:55| and the same claim in strkjv@17:25; strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@Luke:10:22| (the Johannine aerolite). "These three words contain the unique claim of Jesus, which is pressed all through the chapters of controversy with the Jews" (Bernard). Jesus is the Interpreter of God to men (John:1:18|). {And he sent me} (\kakeinos me apesteilen\). First aorist active indicative of \apostell\, the very verb used of Jesus when he sent forth the twelve (Matthew:10:5|) and used by Jesus again of himself in strkjv@John:17:3|. He is the Father's Apostle to men.
rwp@John:8:12 @{Again therefore} (\palin oun\). This language fits in better with strkjv@7:52| than with strkjv@8:11|. Just suppose Jesus is in the temple on the following day. {Unto them} (\autois\). The Pharisees and crowds in the temple after the feast was past. {I am the light of the world} (\eg eimi to phs tou kosmou\). Jesus had called his followers "the light of the world" (Matthew:5:14|), but that was light reflected from him. Already Jesus (the Logos) had been called the true light of men (1:9; strkjv@3:19|). The Psalmist calls God his Light (27:1|). Songs:Isaiah:60:19|. At the feast of tabernacles in the Court of the Women where Jesus was on this day (8:20|) there were brilliant candelabra and there was the memory of the pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night. But with all this background this supreme and exclusive claim of Jesus (repeated in strkjv@9:5|) to being the light of the whole world (of Gentiles as well as of Jews) startled the Pharisees and challenged their opposition. {Shall have the light of life} (\hexei to phs ts zs\). The light which springs from and issues in life (Westcott). Cf. strkjv@6:33,51| about Jesus being the Bread of Life. In this sublime claim we come to a decisive place. It will not do to praise Jesus and deny his deity. Only as the Son of God can we justify and accept this language which otherwise is mere conceit and froth.
rwp@John:8:13 @{Of thyself} (\peri seautou\). This technical objection was according to the rules of evidence among the rabbis. "No man can give witness for himself" (_Mishnah, Ketub_. 11. 9). Hence, they say, "not true" (\ouk althes\), not pertinent. "They were still in the region of pedantic rules and external tests." In strkjv@John:5:31| Jesus acknowledged this technical need of further witness outside of his own claims (John:19-30|) and proceeded to give it (John:32-47|) in the testimony of the Baptist, of the Father, of his works, of the Scriptures, and of Moses in particular.
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:8:17 @{Yea and in your law} (\kai en ti nomi de ti humeteri\). Same use of \kai--de\ as in verse 16|. They claimed possession of the law (7:49|) and so Jesus takes this turn in answer to the charge of single witness in verse 13|. He will use similar language (your law) in strkjv@10:34| in an _argumentum ad hominem_ as here in controversy with the Jews. In strkjv@15:24| to the apostles Jesus even says "in their law" in speaking of the hostile Jews plotting his death. He does not mean in either case to separate himself wholly from the Jews and the law, though in Matthew 5 he does show the superiority of his teaching to that of the law. For the Mosaic regulation about two witnesses see strkjv@Deuteronomy:17:6; strkjv@19:15|. This combined witness of two is not true just because they agree, unless true in fact separately. But if they disagree, the testimony falls to the ground. In this case the Father confirms the witness of the Son as Jesus had already shown (5:37|).
rwp@John:8:18 @{The Father} (\ho patr\). Clearly genuine here. Songs:these are the two witnesses that Jesus presents to the Pharisees in defence of his claim to be the Light of the World (verse 12|).
rwp@John:8:19 @{Where is thy Father?} (\pou estin ho patr sou;\). "The testimony of an unseen and unheard witness would not satisfy them" (Vincent). Bernard understands the Pharisees to see that Jesus claims God the Father as his second witness and so ask "where," not "who" he is. Augustine has it: _Patrem Christi carnaliter acceperunt_, Christ's human father, as if the Pharisees were "misled perhaps by the Lord's use of \anthrpon\ (verse 17|)" (Dods). Cyril even took it to be a coarse allusion to the birth of Jesus as a bastard according to the Talmud. Perhaps the Pharisees used the question with _double entendre_, even with all three ideas dancing in their hostile minds. {Ye would know my Father also} (\kai ton patera mou an ideite\). Conclusion of second-class condition determined as unfulfilled with \an\ and second perfect active of \oida\ used as imperfect in both condition and conclusion. See this same point made to Philip in strkjv@14:9|. In strkjv@14:7| Jesus will use \ginsk\ in the condition and \oida\ in the conclusion. The ignorance of the Pharisees about Jesus proves it and is due to their ignorance of the Father. See this point more fully stated in strkjv@5:36-38| when Jesus had his previous controversy in Jerusalem. In strkjv@7:28| Jesus said that they knew his home in Nazareth, but he denied then that they knew the Father who sent him. Jesus will again on this occasion (8:55|) deny their knowledge of the Father. Later he will deny their knowledge of the Father and of the Son (16:3|). The Pharisees are silenced for the moment.
rwp@John:8:24 @{For except ye believe} (\ean gar m pisteuste\). Negative condition of third class with \ean m\ and ingressive aorist active subjunctive of \pisteu\, "For unless ye come to believe." {That I am he} (\hoti eg eimi\). Indirect discourse, but with no word in the predicate after the copula \eimi\. Jesus can mean either "that I am from above" (verse 23|), "that I am the one sent from the Father or the Messiah" (7:18,28|), "that I am the Light of the World" (8:12|), "that I am the Deliverer from the bondage of sin" (8:28,31f.,36|), "that I am" without supplying a predicate in the absolute sense as the Jews (Deuteronomy:32:39|) used the language of Jehovah (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:43:10| where the very words occur \hina pisteuste--hoti eg eimi\). The phrase \eg eimi\ occurs three times here (8:24,28,58|) and also in strkjv@13:19|. Jesus seems to claim absolute divine being as in strkjv@8:58|.
rwp@John:8:25 @{Who art thou?} (\Su tis ei;\). Proleptic use of \su\ before \tis\, "Thou, who art thou?" Cf. strkjv@1:19|. He had virtually claimed to be the Messiah and on a par with God as in strkjv@5:15|. They wish to pin him down and to charge him with blasphemy. {Even that which I have also spoken unto you from the beginning} (\tn archn hoti kai lal humin\). A difficult sentence. It is not clear whether it is an affirmation or a question. The Latin and Syriac versions treat it as affirmative. Westcott and Hort follow Meyer and take it as interrogative. The Greek fathers take it as an exclamation. It seems clear that the adverbial accusative \tn archn\ cannot mean "from the beginning" like \ap' archs\ (15:27|) or \ex archs\ (16:4|). The LXX has \tn archn\ for "at the beginning" or "at the first" (Genesis:43:20|). There are examples in Greek, chiefly negative, where \tn archn\ means "at all," "essentially," "primarily." Vincent and Bernard so take it here, "Primarily what I am telling you." Jesus avoids the term Messiah with its political connotations. He stands by his high claims already made.
rwp@John:8:26 @{I have many things to speak and to judge concerning you} (\polla ech peri humn lalein kai krinein\). Instead of further talk about his own claims (already plain enough) Jesus turns to speak and to judge concerning them and their attitude towards him (cf. verse 16|). Whatever they think of Jesus the Father who sent him is true (\alths\). They cannot evade responsibility for the message heard. Songs:Jesus goes on speaking it from the Father.
rwp@John:8:28 @{When ye have lifted up the Son of man} (\hotan hupsste ton huion tou anthrpou\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ (\hote + an\) and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hupso\, to lift up (_Koin_ verb from \hupsos\, height), used several times in John of the Cross of Christ (3:14; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@12:32,34|). It is unnecessary to render the aorist subjunctive as if a future perfect, simply "whenever ye lift up" (actually lift up, ingressive aorist). In strkjv@Acts:2:33| the verb is used of the Ascension. {Shall ye know} (\gnsesthe\). Future (ingressive aoristic) middle of \ginsk\. _Cognoscetis ex re quod nunc ex verbo non creditis_ (Bengel). But the knowledge from the facts like the fall of Jerusalem will come too late and will not bring a change of heart. The Holy Spirit will convict them concerning judgment (16:8|). For {I am} (\eg eimi\) see on verse ¯24|. {As the Father taught me} (\Kaths edidasken me ho patr\). This claim Jesus repeats (see verse 26|) and clearly makes on his arrival at the feast (7:16f.|). This fact marks Jesus off from the rabbis.
rwp@John:8:31 @{Which had believed him} (\tous pepisteukotas auti\). Articular perfect active participle of \pisteu\ with dative \auti\ (trusted him) rather than \eis auton\ (on him) in verse 30|. They believed him (cf. strkjv@6:30|) as to his claims to being the Messiah with their own interpretation (6:15|), but they did not commit themselves to him and may represent only one element of those in verse 30|, but see strkjv@2:23| for \pisteu eis\ there. {If ye abide in my word} (\ean humeis meinte en ti logi ti emi\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and first aorist (constative) active subjunctive. {Are ye truly my disciples} (\alths mathtai mou este\). Your future loyalty to my teaching will prove the reality of your present profession. Songs:the conclusion of this future condition is put in the present tense. As then, so now. We accept church members on _profession_ of trust in Christ. Continuance in the word (teaching) proves the sincerity or insincerity of the profession. It is the acid test of life.
rwp@John:8:32 @{And ye shall know the truth} (\kai gnsesthe tn altheian\). Truth is one of the marks of Christ (1:14|) and Jesus will claim to Thomas to be the personification of truth (14:6|). But it will be for them knowledge to be learned by doing God's will (7:17|). The word is from \alths\ (\a\ privative and \lth\, to conceal, unsealed, open). See also verses 40,44,45|. {And the truth shall make you free} (\kai h altheia eleuthersei humas\). Future active indicative of \eleuthero\, old verb from \eleutheros\ (from \erchomai\, to go where one wishes and so free). One of Paul's great words for freedom from the bondage of the law (Romans:6:18; strkjv@Galatians:5:1|). The freedom of which Jesus here speaks is freedom from the slavery of sin as Paul in strkjv@Romans:8:2|. See strkjv@John:8:36|. This freedom is won alone by Christ (8:36|) and we are sanctified in truth (17:19|). In strkjv@1:17| truth is mentioned with grace as one of the marks of the gospel through Christ. Freedom (intellectual, moral, spiritual) is only attainable when we are set free from darkness, sin, ignorance, superstition and let the Light of the World shine on us and in us.
rwp@John:8:39 @{Our father is Abraham} (\ho patr hmn Abraam estin\). They saw the implication and tried to counter it by repeating their claim in verse 33| which was true so far as physical descent went as Jesus had admitted (verse 37|). {If ye were} (\ei este\). Strictly, "if ye are" as ye claim, a condition of the first class assumed to be true. {Ye would do} (\epoieite an\). Read by C L N and a corrector of Aleph while W omits \an\. This makes a mixed condition (protasis of the first class, apodosis of the second. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1022). But B reads \poieite\ like the Sin. Syriac which has to be treated as imperative (so Westcott and Hort).
rwp@John:9:28 @{They reviled him} (\eloidorsan auton\). First aorist active indicative of \loidore\, old verb from \loidoros\ (reviler, strkjv@1Corinthians:5:11|), in N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:23:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:12; strkjv@1Peter:2:23|. {Thou art his disciple} (\su mathts ei ekeinou\). Probably a fling in \ekeinou\ (of that fellow). He had called him a prophet (9:17|) and became a joyful follower later (9:36-38|). {But we are disciples of Moses} (\hmeis de tou Muses esmen mathtai\). This they said with proud scorn of the healed beggar. All orthodox rabbis so claimed.
rwp@John:9:35 @{Finding him} (\heurn auton\). Second aorist active participle of \heurisk\, after search because of what he had heard (\kousen\). {Dost thou believe on the Son of God?} (\Su pisteueis eis ton huion tou theou;\). Songs:A L Theta and most versions, but Aleph B D W Syr-sin read \tou anthrpou\ (the Son of Man), almost certainly correct. In either case it is a distinct Messianic claim quite beyond the range of this man's limited knowledge, keen as he is.
rwp@John:10:15 @{And I know the Father} (\kag ginsk ton patera\). Hence he is qualified to reveal the Father (1:18|). The comparison of the mutually reciprocal knowledge between the Father and the Son illustrates what he has just said, though it stands above all else (Matthew:11:27; strkjv@Luke:10:22; strkjv@John:17:21-26|). We cannot claim such perfect knowledge of the Good Shepherd as exists between the Father and the Son and yet the real sheep do know the Shepherd's voice and do love to follow his leadership here and now in spite of thieves, robbers, wolves, hirelings. {And I lay down my life for the sheep} (\kai tn psuchn mou tithmi huper tn probatn\). This he had said in verse 11|, but he repeats it now for clearness. This he does not just as an example for the sheep and for under-shepherds, but primarily to save the sheep from the wolves, the thieves and robbers.
rwp@John:10:20 @{He has a demon and is mad} (\daimonion echei kai mainetai\). As some had already said (7:20; strkjv@8:48| with the addition of "Samaritan"). Songs:long before in strkjv@Mark:3:21|. An easy way of discounting Jesus.
rwp@John:10:21 @{Of one possessed with a demon} (\daimonizomenou\). Genitive of present passive participle of \daimoniz\. They had heard demoniacs talk, but not like this. {Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?} (\m daimonion dunatai tuphlon ophthalmous anoixai;\). Negative answer expected. Demons would more likely put out eyes, not open them. It was an unanswerable question.
rwp@John:10:24 @{Came round about him} (\ekuklsan auton\). Aorist active indicative of \kuklo\, old verb from \kuklos\ (cycle, circle). See strkjv@Acts:14:20| for the circle of disciples around Paul when stoned. Evidently the hostile Jews cherished the memory of the stinging rebuke given them by Jesus when here last, particularly the allegory of the Good Shepherd (10:1-19|), in which he drew so sharply their own picture. {How long dost thou hold us in suspense?} (\hes pote tn psuchn hmn aireis;\). Literally, "Until when dost thou lift up our soul?" But what do they mean by this metaphor? \Air\ is common enough to lift up the eyes (John:11:41|), the voice (Luke:17:13|), and in strkjv@Psalms:25:1; strkjv@86:4| (Josephus, _Ant_. III. ii. 3) we have "to lift up the soul." We are left to the context to judge the precise meaning. Clearly the Jews mean to imply doubt and suspense. The next remark makes it clear. {If thou art the Christ} (\ei su ei ho Christos\). Condition of first class assumed to be true for the sake of argument. {Tell us plainly} (\eipon hmin parrsii\). Conclusion with \eipon\ rather than the usual \eipe\ as if first aorist active imperative like \luson\. The point is in "plainly" (\parrsii\), adverb as in strkjv@7:13,26| which see. That is to say "I am the Christ" in so many words. See strkjv@11:14; strkjv@16:29| for the same use of \parrsii\. The demand seemed fair enough on the surface. They had made it before when here at the feast of tabernacles (8:25|). Jesus declined to use the word \Christos\ (Messiah) then as now because of the political bearing of the word in their minds. The populace in Galilee had once tried to make him king in opposition to Pilate (John:6:14f.|). When Jesus does confess on oath before Caiaphas that he is the Christ the Son of God (Mark:14:61f.; strkjv@Matthew:26:63f.|), the Sanhedrin instantly vote him guilty of blasphemy and then bring him to Pilate with the charge of claiming to be king as a rival to Caesar. Jesus knew their minds too well to be caught now.
rwp@John:10:25 @{I told you, and you believe not} (\eipon humin kai ou pisteuete\). It was useless to say more. In strkjv@7:14-10:18| Jesus had shown that he was the Son of the Father as he had previously claimed (5:17-47|), but it was all to no purpose save to increase their rage towards him. {These bear witness of me} (\tauta marturei peri emou\). His works confirm his words as he had shown before (5:36|). They believe neither his words nor his works.
rwp@John:10:30 @{One} (\hen\). Neuter, not masculine (\heis\). Not one person (cf. \heis\ in strkjv@Galatians:3:28|), but one essence or nature. By the plural \sumus\ (separate persons) Sabellius is refuted, by \unum\ Arius. Songs:Bengel rightly argues, though Jesus is not referring, of course, to either Sabellius or Arius. The Pharisees had accused Jesus of making himself equal with God as his own special Father (John:5:18|). Jesus then admitted and proved this claim (5:19-30|). Now he states it tersely in this great saying repeated later (17:11, 21|). Note \hen\ used in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:3| of the oneness in work of the planter and the waterer and in strkjv@17:11,23| of the hoped for unity of Christ's disciples. This crisp statement is the climax of Christ's claims concerning the relation between the Father and himself (the Son). They stir the Pharisees to uncontrollable anger.
rwp@John:10:35 @{If he called them gods} (\ei ekeinous eipen theous\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. The conclusion (verse 36|) is \humeis legete\; ({Do ye say?}). As Jews (and rabbis) they are shut out from charging Jesus with blasphemy because of this usage in the O.T. It is a complete _ad hominem_ argument. To be sure, it is in strkjv@Psalms:82:6| a lower use of the term \theos\, but Jesus did not call himself "Son of Jahweh," but "\huios theou\" which can mean only "Son of _Elohim_." It must not be argued, as some modern men do, that Jesus thus disclaims his own deity. He does nothing of the kind. He is simply stopping the mouths of the rabbis from the charge of blasphemy and he does it effectually. The sentence is quite involved, but can be cleared up. {To whom the word of God came} (\pros hous ho logos tou theou egeneto\). The relative points to \ekeinous\, before. These judges had no other claim to the term \theoi\ (_elohim_). {And the scripture cannot be broken} (\kai ou dunatai luthnai h graph\). A parenthesis that drives home the pertinency of the appeal, one that the Pharisees had to accept. \Luthnai\ is first aorist passive infinitive of \lu\, to loosen, to break.
rwp@John:10:37 @{If I do not} (\ei ou poi\). Condition of first class, assumed as true, with negative \ou\, not \ei m\=unless. {Believe me not} (\m pisteuete moi\). Prohibition with \m\ and the present active imperative. Either "cease believing me" or "do not have the habit of believing me." Jesus rests his case on his doing the works of "my Father" (\tou patros mou\), repeating his claims to sonship and deity.
rwp@John:10:38 @{But if I do} (\ei de poi\). Condition again of the first class, assumed as true, but with the opposite results. {Though ye believe not me} (\kan emoi m pisteute\). Condition now of third class, undetermined (but with prospect), "Even if you keep on (present active subjunctive of \pisteuo\) not believing me." {Believe the works} (\tois ergois pisteuete\). These stand irrefutable. The claims, character, words, and works of Jesus challenge the world today as then. {That ye may know and understand} (\hina gnte kai ginskte\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the same verb \ginsk\ repeated in different tenses (first \gnte\, the second ingressive aorist active subjunctive, that ye may come to know; then the present active subjunctive, "that ye may keep on knowing"). This is Christ's deepest wish about his enemies who stand with stones in their uplifted hands to fling at him. {That the Father is in me, and I in the Father} (\hoti en emoi ho patr kag en ti patri\). Thus he repeats (verse 30|) sharply his real claim to oneness with the Father as his Son, to actual deity. It was a hopeless wish.
rwp@John:11:9 @{In the day} (\ts hmeras\). Genitive of time, within the day, the twelve-hour day in contrast with night. The words of Jesus here illustrate what he had said in strkjv@9:4|. It is not blind fatalism that Jesus proclaims, but the opposite of cowardice. He has full confidence in the Father s purpose about his "hour" which has not yet come. Jesus has courage to face his enemies again to do the Father's will about Lazarus. {If a man walk in the day} (\ean tis peripati en ti hmeri\). Condition of the third class, a conceived case and it applies to Jesus who walks in the full glare of noonday. See strkjv@8:12| for the contrast between walking in the light and in the dark. {He stumbleth not} (\ou proskoptei\). He does not cut (or bump) against this or that obstacle, for he can see. \Kopt\ is to cut and pros, against.
rwp@John:11:54 @{Therefore walked no more openly} (\oun ouketi parrsii periepatei\). Imperfect active of \peripate\, to walk around. Jesus saw clearly that to do so would bring on the end now instead of his "hour" which was to be at the passover a month ahead. {Into the country near to the wilderness} (\eis tn chran eggus ts ermou\). It was now in Jerusalem as it had become once in Galilee (7:1|) because of the plots of the hostile Jews. The hill country northeast of Jerusalem was thinly populated. {Into a city called Ephraim} (\eis Ephraim legomenn polin\). \Polis\ here means no more than town or village (\km\). The place is not certainly known, not mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. Josephus mentions (_War_, IV. ix. 9) a small fort near Bethel in the hill country and in strkjv@2Chronicles:13:19| Ephron is named in connexion with Bethel. Up here Jesus would at least be free for the moment from the machinations of the Sanhedrin while he faced the coming catastrophe at the passover. He is not far from the mount of temptation where the devil showed and offered him the kingdoms of the world for the bending of the knee before him. Is it mere fancy to imagine that the devil came to see Jesus again here at this juncture with a reminder of his previous offer and of the present plight of the Son of God with the religious leaders conspiring his death? At any rate Jesus has the fellowship of his disciples this time (\meta tn mathtn\). But what were they thinking?
rwp@John:11:55 @{Was near} (\n eggus\). See strkjv@2:13| for the same phrase. This last passover was the time of destiny for Jesus. {Before the passover to purify themselves} (\pro tou pascha hina hagnissin heautous\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hagniz\, old verb from \hagnos\ (pure), ceremonial purification here, of course. All this took time. These came "from the country" (\ek ts chras\), from all over Palestine, from all parts of the world, in fact. John shifts the scene to Jerusalem just before the passover with no record of the way that Jesus came to Jerusalem from Ephraim. The Synoptic Gospels tell this last journey up through Samaria into Galilee to join the great caravan that crossed over into Perea and came down on the eastern side of the Jordan opposite Jericho and then marched up the mountain road to Bethany and Bethphage just beside Jerusalem. This story is found in strkjv@Luke:17:11-19:28; strkjv@Mark:10:1-52; strkjv@Matthew:19:1-20:34|. John simply assumes the Synoptic narrative and gives the picture of things in and around Jerusalem just before the passover (11:56,57|).
rwp@John:13:3 @{Knowing} (\eids\). Repeated from verse 1|, accenting the full consciousness of Jesus. {Had given} (\edken\). Songs:Aleph B L W, aorist active instead of \dedken\ (perfect active) of \didmi\. Cf. strkjv@3:31| for a similar statement with \en\ instead of \eis\. See strkjv@Matthew:11:27| (Luke:10:22|) and strkjv@28:18| for like claim by Jesus to complete power. {And that he came forth from God, and goeth unto God} (\kai hoti apo theou exlthen kai pros ton theon hupagei\). See plain statement by Jesus on this point in strkjv@16:28|. The use of \pros ton theon\ recalls the same words in strkjv@1:1|. Jesus is fully conscious of his deity and Messianic dignity when he performs this humble act.
rwp@John:13:13 @{Ye} (\humeis\). Emphatic. {Call me} (\phneite me\). "Address me." \Phne\ regular for addressing one with his title (1:48|). {Master} (\Hosea:didaskalos\). Nominative form (not in apposition with \me\ accusative after \phneite\), but really vocative in address with the article (called titular nominative sometimes) like \Hosea:Kurios kai ho theos mou\ in strkjv@20:28|. "Teacher." See strkjv@11:28| for Martha's title for Jesus to Mary. {Lord} (\Hosea:Kurios\). Another and separate title. In strkjv@1:38| we have \Didaskale\ (vocative form) for the Jewish \Rabbei\ and in strkjv@9:36,38| \Kurie\ for the Jewish _Mari_. It is significant that Jesus approves (\kals\, well) the application of both titles to himself as he accepts from Thomas the terms \kurios\ and \theos\. {For I am} (\eimi gar\). Jesus distinctly claims here to be both Teacher and Lord in the full sense, at the very moment when he has rendered this menial, but symbolic, service to them. Here is a hint for those who talk lightly about "the peril of worshipping Jesus!"
rwp@John:13:19 @{From henceforth} (\ap' arti\). "From now on," as in strkjv@14:7; strkjv@Matthew:23:39; strkjv@Revelation:14:13|. {Before it come to pass} (\pro tou genesthai\). \Pro\ with ablative of the articular second aorist middle infinitive \ginomai\ (before the coming to pass). {When it is come to pass} (\hotan gentai\). Indefinite relative clause with \hotan\ and the second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\, "whenever it does come to pass." {That ye may believe} (\hina pisteute\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive of \pisteu\, "that ye may keep on believing." Cf. strkjv@Isaiah:48:5|. {That I am he} (\hoti eg eimi\). As Jesus has repeatedly claimed to be the Messiah (8:24,58|, etc.). Cf. also strkjv@14:29| (\pisteuste\ here); strkjv@16:4|.
rwp@John:17:2 @{Authority over all flesh} (\exousian pass sarkos\). \Sarkos\ is objective genitive. Stupendous claim impossible for a mere man to make. Made already in strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@Luke:10:22| (Q, the Logia of Jesus, our earliest known document about Jesus) and repeated in strkjv@Matthew:28:18| after his resurrection. {That} (\hina\). Secondary purpose with \hina dsei\ (future active indicative) carrying on the idea of \hina doxasi\. See strkjv@13:34; strkjv@17:21| for \hina, kaths, hina\. {Whatsoever} (\pn ho\). A peculiar classical Greek idiom, the collective use of the singular \pn ho\ as in strkjv@6:37,39| and \ho\ in strkjv@17:24| and the nominative absolute (_nom. pendens_) with \autois\ (to them), the dative plural explaining the construction. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 653.
rwp@John:17:6 @{I manifested} (\ephanersa\). First aorist active indicative of \phanero\ (from \phaneros\, manifest). Another word for claiming successful accomplishment of his task as in verse 4| with \edoxasa\ and in verse 26| with \egnrisa\. {Whom} (\hous\). Accusative case after \edkas\, not attracted to case of antecedent (\anthrpois\). Jesus regards the apostles as the Father's gift to him. Recall the night of prayer before he chose them. {They have kept} (\tetrkan\). Perfect active indicative, late _Koin_ form for the third plural instead of the usual \tetrkasin\. Jesus claims loyalty and fidelity in these men with the one exception of Judas (verse 12|). He does not claim perfection for them, but they have at least held on to the message of the Father in spite of doubt and wavering (6:67-71; strkjv@Matthew:16:15-20|).
rwp@John:18:6 @{Fell to the ground} (\epesan chamai\). Second aorist active indicative of \pipt\ with first aorist ending (\-an\). This recoil made them stumble. But why did they step back? Was it the former claim of Jesus ({I am}, \eg eimi\) to be on an equality with God (8:58; strkjv@13:19|) or mere embarrassment and confusion or supernatural power exerted by Jesus? B adds \Isous\ which must mean simply: "I am Jesus."
rwp@John:18:33 @{Again} (\palin\). Back into the palace where Pilate was before. {Called} (\ephnsen\). First aorist active indicative of \phne\. Jesus was already inside the court (verse 28|). Pilate now summoned him to his presence since he saw that he had to handle the case. The charge that Jesus claimed to be a king compelled him to do so (Luke:23:2|). {Art thou the King of the Jews?} (\su ei ho basileus tn Ioudain;\). This was the vital problem and each of the Gospels has the question (Mark:15:2; strkjv@Matthew:27:1; strkjv@Luke:23:3; strkjv@John:18:33|), though Luke alone (23:2|) gives the specific accusation. {Thou} (\su\). Emphatic. Jesus did claim to be the spiritual king of Israel as Nathanael said (John:1:49|) and as the ecstatic crowd hailed him on the Triumphal Entry (John:12:13|), but the Sanhedrin wish Pilate to understand this in a civil sense as a rival of Caesar as some of the Jews wanted Jesus to be (John:6:15|) and as the Pharisees expected the Messiah to be.
rwp@John:18:36 @{My kingdom} (\h basileia h em\). Christ claims to be king to Pilate, but of a peculiar kingdom. For "world" (\kosmou\) see strkjv@17:13-18|. {My servants} (\hoi hupretai hoi emoi\). For the word see verse 3| where it means the temple police or guards (literally, under-rowers). In the LXX always (Proverbs:14:35; strkjv@Isaiah:32:5; strkjv@Daniel:3:46|) officers of a king as here. Christ then had only a small band of despised followers who could not fight against Caesar. Was he alluding also to legions of angels on his side? (Matthew:26:56|). {Would fight} (\gnizonto an\). Imperfect middle of \agnizomai\ common verb (only here in John, but see strkjv@1Corinthians:9:25|) from \agn\ (contest) with \an\, a conclusion of the second-class condition (assumed as untrue). Christians should never forget the profound truth stated here by Jesus. {That I should not be delivered} (\hina m paradoth\). Negative final clause with \hina m\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \paradidmi\ (see verses 28,36|). Jesus expects Pilate to surrender to the Jews. {But now} (\nun de\). In contrast to the condition already stated as in strkjv@8:40; strkjv@9:41; strkjv@15:22,24|.
rwp@John:19:12 @{Sought} (\eztei\). Imperfect active, "kept on seeking," "made renewed efforts to release him." He was afraid to act boldly against the will of the Jews. {If thou release this man} (\ean touton apolusis\). Condition of third class, a direct threat to Pilate. He knew all the time that the Sanhedrin might tell Caesar on him. {Thou art not Caesar's friend} (\ouk ei philos tou kaisaros\). Later to Vespasian this was an official title, here simply a daring threat to Pilate. {Speaketh against Caesar} (\antilegei ti kaisari\). Caesar brooks no rival. Jesus had allowed himself to be acclaimed king of Israel in the Triumphal Entry (John:12:13; strkjv@Mark:11:10; strkjv@Luke:19:38|). The Sanhedrin have caught Pilate in their toils.
rwp@John:19:14 @{The Preparation of the passover} (\paraskeu tou pascha\). That is, Friday of passover week, the preparation day before the Sabbath of passover week (or feast). See also verses 31,42; strkjv@Mark:15:42; strkjv@Matthew:27:62; strkjv@Luke:23:54| for this same use of \paraskeu\ for Friday. It is the name for Friday today in Greece. {About the sixth hour} (\hs hekt\). Roman time, about 6 A.M. (a little after 6 no doubt) when Pilate rendered his final decision. Mark (Mark:15:25|) notes that it was the third hour (Jewish time), which is 9 A.M. Roman time, when the crucifixion began. Why should John give Jewish time writing at the close of the first century when Jerusalem and the Jewish state passed away in A.D. 70? He is writing for Greek and Roman readers. {Behold your king} (\Ide ho basileus humn\). \Ide\ is here an exclamation with no effect on the case of \basileus\ just as in strkjv@1:29|. The sarcasm of Pilate is aimed at the Jews, not at Jesus.
rwp@John:19:26 @{His mother} (\tn mtera\). Common Greek idiom, the article as possessive. {Standing by} (\parestta\). Perfect active (intransitive) participle of \paristmi\, vivid and picturesque scene. The dying Saviour thinks of the comfort of his mother. {Whom he loved} (\hon gapa\). Imperfect active. Surely John is justified in inserting this phrase here. If John were his cousin, that helps explain why Jesus turns the care of his mother over to him. But the brothers of Jesus are not present and disbelieved his claims. John is the only one of the apostles with courage enough to take his stand with the women by the Cross. There is no disrespect in the use of "Woman" (\Gunai\) here as there was not in strkjv@2:4|. This trust is to John, though Salome, John's own mother, was standing there.
rwp@John:19:34 @{With a spear} (\logchi\). Instrumental case of this old word, here only in the N.T. {Pierced his side} (\autou tn pleuran enuxen\). First aorist active indicative of \nuss\, old word to pierce, here only in N.T., and \pleuran\ (side), another old word, occurs in N.T. only here and strkjv@John:20:20,25,27|. {Blood and water} (\haima kai hudr\). Dr. W. Stroud (_Physical Cause of the Death of Christ_) argues that this fact proves that the spear pierced the left side of Jesus near the heart and that Jesus had died literally of a broken heart since blood was mixed with water.
rwp@John:20:23 @{Whosesoever sins ye forgive} (\an tinn aphte tas hamartias\). "If the sins of any ye forgive" (\aphte\, second aorist active subjunctive with \an\ in the sense of \ean\), a condition of the third class. Precisely so with "retain" (\kratte\, present active subjunctive of \krate\). {They are forgiven} (\aphentai\). Perfect passive indicative of \aphimi\, Doric perfect for \apheintai\. {Are retained} (\kekratntai\). Perfect passive indicative of \krate\. The power to forgive sin belongs only to God, but Jesus claimed to have this power and right (Mark:2:5-7|). What he commits to the disciples and to us is the power and privilege of giving assurance of the forgiveness of sins by God by correctly announcing the terms of forgiveness. There is no proof that he actually transferred to the apostles or their successors the power in and of themselves to forgive sins. In strkjv@Matthew:16:19; strkjv@18:18| we have a similar use of the rabbinical metaphor of binding and loosing by proclaiming and teaching. Jesus put into the hands of Peter and of all believers the keys of the Kingdom which we should use to open the door for those who wish to enter. This glorious promise applies to all believers who will tell the story of Christ's love for men.
rwp@John:21:15 @{Lovest thou me more than these?} (\agapis me pleon toutn;\). Ablative case of comparison \toutn\ (disciples) after \pleon\. Peter had even boasted that he would stand by Christ though all men forsook him (Mark:14:29|). We do not know what passed between Jesus and Peter when Jesus first appeared to him (Luke:24:34|). But here Christ probes the inmost recesses of Peter's heart to secure the humility necessary for service. {I love thee} (\phil su\). Peter makes no claim here to superior love and passes by the "more than these" and does not even use Christ's word \agapa\ for high and devoted love, but the humbler word \phile\ for love as a friend. He insists that Christ knows this in spite of his conduct. {Feed my lambs} (\Boske ta arnia mou\). For the old word \bosk\ (to feed as a herdsman) see strkjv@Matthew:8:33|. Present active imperative here. \Arnia\ is a diminutive of \arnos\ (lamb).
rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE EPISTLE OF JUDE ABOUT A.D. 65 TO 67 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION THE AUTHOR He calls himself Judas, but this was a very common name. In the N.T. itself we have Judas Iscariot and Judas not Iscariot (John:14:22|; also called Judas of James, son or brother, strkjv@Luke:6:6|), Judas a brother of our Lord (Matthew:13:55|), Judas of Galilee (Acts:5:37|), Judas of Damascus (Acts:9:11|), Judas Barsabbas (Acts:15:22|). The author explains that he is a "slave" of Jesus Christ as James did (Jude:1:1|), and adds that he is also a brother of James. Clement of Alexandria thinks that, like James, he deprecated being called the brother of the Lord Jesus (as by Hegesippus later) as claiming too much authority. Keil identifies him with Jude:the Apostle (not Iscariot), but that is most unlikely. The Epistle is one of the disputed books of Eusebius. It was recognized in the canon in the Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397). It appears in the Muratorian Canon (A.D. 170).
rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL In his Preface or Prologue (Luke:1:1-4|) the author tells us that he had two kinds of sources, oral and written, and that they were many, how many we have no way of telling. It is now generally accepted that we know two of his written sources, Mark's Gospel and Q or the Logia of Jesus (written by Matthew, Papias says). Mark is still preserved and it is not difficult for any one by the use of a harmony of the Gospels to note how Luke made use of Mark, incorporating what he chose, adapting it in various ways, not using what did not suit his purposes. The other source we only know in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke, that is the material common to both, but not in Mark. This also can be noted by any one in a harmony. Only it is probable that this source was more extensive than just the portions used by both Matthew and Luke. It is probable that both Matthew and Luke each used portions of the Logia not used by the other. But there is a large portion of Luke's Gospel which is different from Mark and Matthew. Some scholars call this source L. There is little doubt that Luke had another document for the material peculiar to him, but it is also probable that he had several others. He spoke of "many." This applies especially to chapters 9 to 21. But Luke expressly says that he had received help from "eye-witnesses and ministers of the word," in oral form this means. It is, then, probable that Luke made numerous notes of such data and used them along with the written sources at his command. This remark applies particularly to chapters 1 and 2 which have a very distinct Semitic (Aramaic) colouring due to the sources used. It is possible, of course, that Mary the mother of Jesus may have written a statement concerning these important matters or that Luke may have had converse with her or with one of her circle. Ramsay, in his volume, _Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?_ shows the likelihood of Luke's contact with Mary or her circle during these two years at Caesarea. Luke handles the data acquired with care and skill as he claims in his Prologue and as the result shows. The outcome is what Renan called the most beautiful book in the world. ![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}