NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp parallel:
rwp@
1Corinthians:2:14 @{Now the natural man} (\psuchikos de anthrpos\). Note absence of article here, "A natural man" (an unregenerate man). Paul does not employ modern psychological terms and he exercises variety in his use of all the terms here present as \pneuma\ and \pneumatikos, psuch\ and \psuchikos, sarx\ and \sarkinos\ and \sarkikos\. A helpful discussion of the various uses of these words in the New Testament is given by Burton in his _New Testament Word Studies_, pp. 62-68, and in his {Spirit, Soul, and Flesh}. The papyri furnish so many examples of \sarx, pneuma\, and \psuch\ that Moulton and Milligan make no attempt at an exhaustive treatment, but give a few miscellaneous examples to illustrate the varied uses that parallel the New Testament. \Psuchikos\ is a qualitative adjective from \psuch\ (breath of life like \anima\, life, soul). Here the Vulgate renders it by _animalis_ and the German by _sinnlich_, the original sense of animal life as in strkjv@Jude:1:19; strkjv@James:3:15|. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:44,46| there is the same contrast between \psuchikos\ and \pneumatikos\ as here. The \psuchikos\ man is the unregenerate man while the \pneumatikos\ man is the renewed man, born again of the Spirit of God. {Receiveth not} (\ou dechetai\). Does not accept, rejects, refuses to accept. In strkjv@Romans:8:7| Paul definitely states the inability (\oude gar dunatai\) of the mind of the flesh to receive the things of the Spirit untouched by the Holy Spirit. Certainly the initiative comes from God whose Holy Spirit makes it possible for us to accept the things of the Spirit of God. They are no longer "foolishness" (\mria\) to us as was once the case (1:23|). Today one notes certain of the _intelligentsia_ who sneer at Christ and Christianity in their own blinded ignorance. {He cannot know them} (\ou dunatai gnnai\). He is not able to get a knowledge (ingressive second aorist active infinitive of \ginsk\). His helpless condition calls for pity in place of impatience on our part, though such an one usually poses as a paragon of wisdom and commiserates the deluded followers of Christ. {They are spiritually judged} (\pneumatiks anakrinetai\). Paul and Luke are fond of this verb, though nowhere else in the N.T. Paul uses it only in I Corinthians. The word means a sifting process to get at the truth by investigation as of a judge. In strkjv@Acts:17:11| the Beroeans scrutinized the Scriptures. These \psuchikoi\ men are incapable of rendering a decision for they are unable to recognize the facts. They judge by the \psuch\ (mere animal nature) rather than by the \pneuma\ (the renewed spirit).
rwp@1Corinthians:6:13 @{But God shall bring to nought both it and them} (\ho de theos kai tautn kai tauta katargsei\). Another proverb about the adaptation of the belly (\koilia\) and food (\brmata\, not just flesh), which had apparently been used by some in Corinth to justify sexual license (fornication and adultery). These Gentiles mixed up matters not alike at all (questions of food and sensuality). " We have traces of this gross moral confusion in the circumstances which dictated the Apostolic Letter (Acts:15:23-29|), where things wholly diverse are combined, as directions about meats to be avoided and a prohibition of fornication" (Lightfoot). Both the belly (\tautn\) and the foods (\tauta\) God will bring to an end by death and change. {But the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body} (\to de sma ou ti porneii alla ti kurii, kai ho kurios ti smati\). Paul here boldly shows the fallacy in the parallel about appetite of the belly for food. The human body has a higher mission than the mere gratification of sensual appetite. Sex is of God for the propagation of the race, not for prostitution. Paul had already stated that God dwells in us as the sanctuary of the Holy Spirit (3:16f.|). This higher function of the body he here puts forward against the debased Greek philosophy of the time which ignored completely Paul's idea, "the body for the Lord and the Lord for the body" (dative of personal interest in both cases). "The Lord Jesus and \porneia\ contested for the bodies of Christian men; loyal to him they must renounce _that_, yielding to _that_ they renounce him" (Findlay).
rwp@1Corinthians:8:9 @{Take heed} (\blepete\). A warning to the enlightened. {Lest by any means} (\m ps\). Common construction after verbs of caution or fearing, \m ps\ with aorist subjunctive \gentai\. {This liberty of yours} (\h exousia humn haut\). \Exousia\, from \exestin\, means a grant, allowance, authority, power, privilege, right, liberty. It shades off easily. It becomes a battle cry, personal liberty does, to those who wish to indulge their own whims and appetites regardless of the effect upon others. {A stumbling-block to the weak} (\proskomma tois asthenesin\). Late word from \proskopt\, to cut against, to stumble against. Songs:an obstacle for the foot to strike. In strkjv@Romans:14:13| Paul uses \skandalon\ as parallel with \proskomma\. We do not live alone. This principle applies to all social relations in matters of law, of health, of morals. _Noblesse oblige_. The enlightened must consider the welfare of the unenlightened, else he does not have love.
rwp@1Corinthians:12:3 @{Wherefore I give you to understand} (\dio gnriz humin\). Causative idea (only in Aeschylus in old Greek) in papyri (also in sense of recognize) and N.T., from root \gn\ in \ginsk\, to know. {Speaking in the Spirit of God} (\en pneumati theou laln\). Either sphere or instrumentality. No great distinction here between \lale\ (utter sounds) and \leg\ (to say). {Jesus is anathema} (\anathema Isous\). On distinction between \anathema\ (curse) and \anathma\ (offering strkjv@Luke:21:5|) see discussion there. In LXX \anathma\ means a thing devoted to God without being redeemed, doomed to destruction (Leviticus:27:28f.; strkjv@Joshua:6:17; strkjv@7:12|). See strkjv@1Corinthians:16:22; strkjv@Galatians:1:8f.; strkjv@Romans:9:3|. This blasphemous language against Jesus was mainly by the Jews (Acts:13:45; strkjv@18:6|). It is even possible that Paul had once tried to make Christians say \Anathema Isous\ (Acts:26:11|). {Jesus is Lord} (\Kurios Isous\). The term \Kurios\, as we have seen, is common in the LXX for God. The Romans used it freely for the emperor in the emperor worship. "Most important of all is the early establishment of a polemical parallelism between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \Kurios\, 'lord.' The new texts have here furnished quite astonishing revelations" (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 349). Inscriptions, ostraca, papyri apply the term to Roman emperors, particularly to Nero when Paul wrote this very letter (_ib._, p. 353f.): "One with 'Nero Kurios' quite in the manner of a formula (without article, like the 'Kurios Jesus' in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|." "The battle-cries of the spirits of error and of truth contending at Corinth" (Findlay). One is reminded of the demand made by Polycarp that he say \Kurios Caesar\ and how each time he replied \Kurios Isous\. He paid the penalty for his loyalty with his life. Lighthearted men today can say "Lord Jesus" in a flippant or even in an irreverent way, but no Jew or Gentile then said it who did not mean it.
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:4:6 @{We} (\hmeis\). In sharp contrast with the false prophets and the world. We are in tune with the Infinite God. Hence "he that knoweth God" (\ho ginskn ton theon\, present active articular participle, the one who keeps on getting acquainted with God, growing in his knowledge of God) "hears us" (\akouei hmn\). This is one reason why sermons are dull (some actually are, others so to dull hearers) or inspiring. There is a touch of mysticism here, to be sure, but the heart of Christianity is mysticism (spiritual contact with God in Christ by the Holy Spirit). John states the same idea negatively by a relative clause parallel with the preceding articular participle, the negative with both clauses. John had felt the cold, indifferent, and hostile stare of the worldling as he preached Jesus. {By this} (\ek toutou\). "From this," deduction drawn from the preceding; only example in the Epistle for the common \en touti\ as in strkjv@4:2|. The power of recognition (\ginskomen\, we know by personal experience) belongs to all believers (Westcott). There is no reason for Christians being duped by "the spirit of error" (\to pneuma ts plans\), here alone in the N.T., though we have \pneumasin planois\ (misleading spirits) in strkjv@1Timothy:4:1|. Rejection of the truth may be due also to our not speaking the truth in love (Ephesians:4:15|).
rwp@1Peter:3:21 @{Which also} (\ho kai\). Water just mentioned. {After a true likeness} (\antitupon\). Water in baptism now as an anti-type of Noah's deliverance by water. For \baptisma\ see on ¯Matthew:3:7|. For \antitupon\ see on ¯Hebrews:9:24| (only other N.T. example) where the word is used of the earthly tabernacle corresponding (\antitupa\) to the heavenly, which is the pattern (\tupon\ strkjv@Hebrews:8:5|) for the earthly. Songs:here baptism is presented as corresponding to (prefigured by) the deliverance of Noah's family by water. It is only a vague parallel, but not over-fanciful. {Doth now save you} (\humas nun szei\). Simplex verb (\sz\, not the compound \diasz\). The saving by baptism which Peter here mentions is only symbolic (a metaphor or picture as in strkjv@Romans:6:2-6|), not actual as Peter hastens to explain. {Not the putting away of the filth of the flesh} (\ou sarkos apothesis rupou\). \Apothesis\ is old word from \apotithmi\ (2:1|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Peter:1:14|. \Rupou\ (genitive of \rupos\) is old word (cf. \ruparos\, filthy, in strkjv@James:2:2; strkjv@Revelation:22:11|), here only in N.T. (cf. strkjv@Isaiah:3:3; strkjv@4:4|). Baptism, Peter explains, does not wash away the filth of the flesh either in a literal sense, as a bath for the body, or in a metaphorical sense of the filth of the soul. No ceremonies really affect the conscience (Hebrews:9:13f.|). Peter here expressly denies baptismal remission of sin. {But the interrogation of a good conscience toward God} (\alla suneidses agaths epertma eis theon\). Old word from \eperta\ (to question as in strkjv@Mark:9:32; strkjv@Matthew:16:1|), here only in N.T. In ancient Greek it never means answer, but only inquiry. The inscriptions of the age of the Antonines use it of the Senate's approval after inquiry. That may be the sense here, that is, avowal of consecration to God after inquiry, having repented and turned to God and now making this public proclamation of that fact by means of baptism (the symbol of the previous inward change of heart). Thus taken, it matters little whether \eis theon\ (toward God) be taken with \epertma\ or \suneidses\. {Through the resurrection of Jesus Christ} (\di' anastases Isou Christou\). For baptism is a symbolic picture of the resurrection of Christ as well as of our own spiritual renewal (Romans:6:2-6|). See strkjv@1:3| for regeneration made possible by the resurrection of Jesus.
rwp@1Thessalonians:4:6 @{That no man transgress} (\to m huperbainein\). Old verb to go beyond. Final use of \to\ (accusative of general reference) and the infinitive (negative \m\), parallel to \apechesthai\ and \eidenai ktasthai\ above. {And wrong his brother} (\kai pleonektein ton adelphon autou\). To take more, to overreach, to take advantage of, to defraud. {In the matter} (\en ti pragmati\). The delicacy of Paul makes him refrain from plainer terms and the context makes it clear enough as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11| (\ti pragmati\). {An avenger} (\ekdikos\). Regular term in the papyri for legal avenger. Modern men and women need to remember that God is the avenger for sexual wrongs both in this life and the next.
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:2:20 @{After they have escaped} (\apophugontes\). Second aorist active participle here (see verse 18|). {The defilements} (\ta miasmata\). Old word miasma, from \miain\, here only in N.T. Our "miasma." The body is sacred to God. Cf. \miasmou\ in verse 10|. {They are again entangled} (\palin emplakentes\). Second aorist passive participle of \emplek\, old verb, to inweave (noosed, fettered), in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:2:4|. {Overcome} (\httntai\). Present passive indicative of \httao\, for which see verse 19|, "are repeatedly worsted." Predicate in the condition of first class with \ei\. It is not clear whether the subject here is "the deluded victims" (Bigg) or the false teachers themselves (Mayor). See strkjv@Hebrews:10:26| for a parallel. {Therein} (\toutois\). Songs:locative case (in these "defilements"), but it can be instrumental case ("by these," Strachan). {With them} (\autois\). Dative of disadvantage, "for them." {Than the first} (\tn prtn\). Ablative case after the comparative \cheirona\. See this moral drawn by Jesus (Matthew:12:45; strkjv@Luke:11:26|).
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:3:10 @{This} (\touto\). What he proceeds to give. {If any will not work, neither let him eat} (\hoti ei tis ou thelei ergazesthai mde esthiet\). Recitative \hoti\ here not to be translated, like our modern quotation marks. Apparently a Jewish proverb based on strkjv@Genesis:3:19|. Wetstein quotes several parallels. Moffatt gives this from Carlyle's _Chartism_: "He that will not work according to his faculty, let him perish according to his necessity." Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 314) sees Paul borrowing a piece of workshop morality. It was needed, as is plain. This is a condition of the first class (note negative \ou\) with the negative imperative in the conclusion.
rwp@2Timothy:2:11 @{Faithful is the saying} (\pistos ho logos\). The saying which follows here though it can refer to the preceding as in strkjv@1Timothy:4:9|. See strkjv@1Timothy:1:15|. It is possible that from here to the end of 13| we have the fragment of an early hymn. There are four conditions in these verses (11-13|), all of the first class, assumed to be true. Parallels to the ideas here expressed are found in strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3; strkjv@Romans:6:3-8; strkjv@Colossians:3:1-4|. Note the compounds with \sun\ (\sunapethanomen\, {we died with}, from \sunapothnesko\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3|; \sunzsomen\, {we shall live with}, from \sunza\ as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:3|; \sumbasileusomen\, {we shall reign with}, from \sumbasileu\ as in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8|). For \hupomenomen\ (we endure) see strkjv@1Corinthians:13:7| and for \apistoumen\ (we are faithless) see strkjv@Romans:3:3|. The verb \arneomai\, to deny (\arnsometha\, we shall deny, \arnsetai\, he will deny, \arnsasthai\, deny, first aorist middle infinitive) is an old word, common in the Gospels in the sayings of Jesus (Matthew:10:33; strkjv@Luke:12:9|), used of Peter (Mark:14:70|), and is common in the Pastorals (1Timothy:5:8; strkjv@Titus:2:12; strkjv@2Timothy:3:5|). Here in verse 13| it has the notion of proving false to oneself, a thing that Christ "cannot" (\ou dunatai\) do.
rwp@2Timothy:2:25 @{Correcting} (\paideuonta\). See strkjv@Titus:2:12|. "Schooling" (Parry). {Oppose themselves} (\antidiatithemenous\). Present middle (direct) participle of \antidiatithmi\, late double compound (Diodorus, Philo) to place oneself in opposition, here only in N.T. {If peradventure God may give} (\m pote di ho theos\). Here Westcott and Hort read the late form of the second aorist active optative of \didmi\ for the usual \doi\ as they do in strkjv@1:18|. But there it is a wish for the future and so regular, while here the optative with \m pote\ in a sort of indirect question is used with a primary tense \dei\ (present) and parallel with an undoubted subjunctive \ananpssin\, while in strkjv@Luke:3:15| \m pote eie\ is with a secondary tense. Examples of such an optative do occur in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 989) so that we cannot go as far as Moulton does and say that we "must" read the subjunctive \di\ here (_Prolegomena_, pp. 55, 193). {Repentance} (\metanoian\). "Change of mind" (2Corinthians:7:10; strkjv@Romans:2:4|). {Unto the knowledge of the truth} (\eis epignsin altheias\). Paul's word "full knowledge" (Co strkjv@1:9|).
rwp@3John:1:5 @{A faithful work} (\piston\). Either thus or "thou makest sure," after an example in Xenophon quoted by Wettstein (\poiein pista\) and parallel to \kaina poie\ in strkjv@Revelation:21:5|. But it is not certain. {In whatsoever thou doest} (\ho ean ergasi\). Indefinite relative with modal \ean\ (=\an\) and the first aorist middle subjunctive of \ergazomai\. See strkjv@Colossians:3:23| for both \poie\ and \ergazomai\ in the same sentence. {And strangers withal} (\kai touto xenous\). "And that too" (accusative of general reference as in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:6; strkjv@Phillipians:1:28; strkjv@Ephesians:2:8|). This praise of hospitality (Romans:12:13; strkjv@1Peter:4:9; strkjv@1Timothy:3:2; strkjv@5:10; strkjv@Titus:1:8; strkjv@Hebrews:13:2|) shows that in strkjv@2John:1:10| John has a peculiar case in mind.
rwp@Acts:7:35 @{This Moses} (\Touton ton Musn\). Rhetorical repetition follows this description of Moses (five times, anaphora, besides the use here, six cases of \houtos\ here about Moses: verse 35| twice, 36,37,38,40|). Clearly Stephen means to draw a parallel between Moses and Jesus. They in Egypt {denied} (\rnsanto\) Moses as now you the Jews denied (\rnsasthe\, strkjv@3:13|) Jesus. Those in Egypt scouted Moses as "ruler and judge" (verses 27,35|, \archonta kai dikastn\) and God "hath sent" (\apestalken\, perfect active indicative, state of completion) Moses "both a ruler and a deliverer" (\archonta kai lutrtn\) as Jesus was to be (Luke:1:68; strkjv@2:38; strkjv@Hebrews:9:12; strkjv@Titus:2:14|). "Ransomer" or "Redeemer" (\lutrts\) is not found elsewhere, \lutron\ (ransom), \lutro\, to ransom, and \lutrsis\, ransoming or redemption, are found often. In strkjv@Acts:5:31| Christ is termed "Prince and Saviour." {With the hand} (\sun cheiri\). Songs:the correct text. The Pharisees had accused Stephen of blaspheming "against Moses and God" (6:11|). Stephen here answers that slander by showing how Moses led the people out of Egypt in co-operation (\sun\) with the hand of the Angel of Jehovah.
rwp@Acts:11:19 @{They therefore that were scattered abroad} (\hoi men oun diasparentes\). Precisely the same words used in strkjv@8:4| about those scattered by Saul (which see) and a direct reference to it is made by the next words, "upon the tribulation that arose about Stephen" (\apo ts thlipses ts genomens epi Stephani\). As a result of (\apo\), in the case of (\epi\) Stephen. From that event Luke followed Saul through his conversion and back to Jerusalem and to Tarsus. Then he showed the activity of Peter outside of Jerusalem as a result of the cessation of the persecution from the conversion of Saul with the Gentile Pentecost in Caesarea and the outcome in Jerusalem. Now Luke starts over again from the same persecution by Saul and runs a new line of events up to Antioch parallel to the other, probably partly following. {Except to Jews only} (\ei m monon Ioudaiois\). Clearly these disciples did not know anything about the events in Caesarea and at first their flight preceded that time. But it was a wonderful episode, the eager and loyal preaching of the fleeing disciples. The culmination in Antioch was probably after the report of Peter about Caesarea. This Antioch by the Orontes was founded 300 B.C. by Seleucus Nicator and was one of five cities so named by the Seleucides. It became the metropolis of Syria though the Arabs held Damascus first. Antioch ranked next to Rome and Alexandria in size, wealth, power, and vice. There were many Jews in the cosmopolitan population of half a million. It was destined to supplant Jerusalem as the centre of Christian activity.
rwp@Acts:12:5 @{Therefore} (\men oun\). Because of the preceding situation. {Was kept} (\etreito\). Imperfect passive, continuously guarded, waiting for the feast to be over. {But prayer was made earnestly} (\proseuch de n ektens ginomen\). Probably \de\ here is not adversative (but), merely parallel (and) as Page argues. It was a crisis for the Jerusalem church. James had been slain and Peter was to be the next victim. Hence "earnestly" (late adverb from \ektens\, strained, from \ektein\, to stretch. In the N.T. only here, strkjv@Luke:22:44; strkjv@1Peter:1:22|) prayer was {going up} (\ginomen\, present middle participle, periphrastic imperfect with \n\). It looked like a desperate case for Peter. Hence the disciples prayed the more earnestly.
rwp@Acts:14:1 @{They entered together} (\kata to auto eiselthein\). Like \epi to auto\ in strkjv@3:1|. The infinitive \eiselthein\ is the subject of \egeneto\. {Songs:spake that} (\lalsai houts hste\). Infinitive again parallel to \eiselthein\. With the result that, actual result here stated with \hste\ and the aorist infinitive \pisteusai\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 999f.) rather than \hste\ and the indicative like strkjv@John:3:16|. It was a tremendous first meeting.
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:19:21 @{Purposed in the spirit} (\etheto en ti pneumati\). Second aorist middle indicative for mental action and "spirit" expressed also. A new stage in Paul's career begins here, a new division of the Acts. {Passed through} (\dielthn\). Word (\dierchomai\) used ten times in Acts (cf. strkjv@19:1|) of missionary journeys (Ramsay). {Macedonia and Achaia} (\tn Makedonian kai Achaian\). This was the way that he actually went, but originally he had planned to go to Achaia (Corinth) and then to Macedonia, as he says in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:15f.|, but he had now changed that purpose, perhaps because of the bad news from Corinth. Already when he wrote I Corinthians he proposed to go first to Macedonia (1Corinthians:16:5-7|). He even hoped to spend the winter in Corinth "if the Lord permit" and to remain in Ephesus till Pentecost, neither of which things he did. {I must also see Rome} (\dei me kai Rmn idein\). This section of Acts begins with Rome in the horizon of Paul's plans and the book closes with Paul in Rome (Rackham). Here he feels the necessity of going as in strkjv@Romans:1:15| he feels himself "debtor" to all including "those in Rome" (Romans:1:16|). Paul had long desired to go to Rome (Rom strkjv@1:10|), but had been frequently hindered (Romans:1:13|), but he has definitely set his face to go to Rome and on to Spain (Romans:15:23-29|). Paley calls sharp attention to this parallel between strkjv@Acts:19:21| and strkjv@Romans:1:10-15; strkjv@15:23-29|. Rome had a fascination for Paul as the home of Aquila and Priscilla and numerous other friends (Romans:16|), but chiefly as the capital of the Roman Empire and a necessary goal in Paul's ambition to win it to Jesus Christ. His great work in Asia had stirred afresh in him the desire to do his part for Rome. He wrote to Rome from Corinth not long after this and in Jerusalem Jesus in vision will confirm the necessity (\dei\) that Paul see Rome (Acts strkjv@23:11|).
rwp@Acts:19:27 @{This our trade} (\touto to meros\). Part, share, task, job, trade. {Come into disrepute} (\eis apelegmon elthein\). Not in the old writers, but in LXX and _Koin_. Literally, reputation, exposure, censure, rejection after examination, and so disrepute. Their business of making gods would lose caste as the liquor trade (still called the trade in England) has done in our day. They felt this keenly and so Demetrius names it first. They felt it in their pockets. {Of the great goddess Artemis} (\ts megals theas Artemidos\). She was generally known as the Great (\h Megal\). An inscription found at Ephesus calls her "the greatest god" (\h megist theos\). The priests were eunuchs and there were virgin priestesses and a lower order of slaves known as temple-sweepers (\nekoroi\, verse 35|). They had wild orgiastic exercises that were disgraceful with their Corybantic processions and revelries. {Be made of no account} (\eis outhen logisthnai\). Be reckoned as nothing, first aorist passive infinitive of \logizomai\ and \eis\. {Should even be deposed of her magnificence} (\mellein te kai kathaireisthai ts megaleiottos auts\). Note the present infinitive after \mellein\, ablative case (so best MSS.) after \kathaire\, to take down, to depose, to deprive of. The word \megaleiots\ occurs also in strkjv@Luke:9:43| (the majesty of God) and in strkjv@2Peter:1:16| of the transfiguration of Christ. It is already in the LXX and Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 363) thinks that the word runs parallel with terms used in the emperor-cult. {All Asia and the world} \hol (h) Asia kai (h) oikoumen\. See strkjv@11:28| for same use of \oikoumen\. An exaggeration, to be sure, but Pausanias says that no deity was more widely worshipped. Temples of Artemis have been found in Spain and Gaul. _Multitudo errantium non efficit veritatem_ (Bengel). Even today heathenism has more followers than Christianity. To think that all this splendour was being set at naught by one man and a despised Jew at that!
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@Colossians:1:15 @{The image} (\eikn\). In predicate and no article. On \eikn\, see strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4; strkjv@3:18; strkjv@Romans:8:29; strkjv@Colossians:3:10|. Jesus is the very stamp of God the Father as he was before the Incarnation (John:17:5|) and is now (Phillipians:2:5-11; strkjv@Hebrews:1:3|). {Of the invisible God} (\tou theou tou aoratou\). But the one who sees Jesus has seen God (John:14:9|). See this verbal adjective (\a\ privative and \hora\) in strkjv@Romans:1:20|. {The first born} (\prtotokos\). Predicate adjective again and anarthrous. This passage is parallel to the \Logos\ passage in strkjv@John:1:1-18| and to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| as well as strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| in which these three writers (John, author of Hebrews, Paul) give the high conception of the Person of Christ (both Son of God and Son of Man) found also in the Synoptic Gospels and even in Q (the Father, the Son). This word (LXX and N.T.) can no longer be considered purely "Biblical" (Thayer), since it is found In inscriptions (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 91) and in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary, etc._). See it already in strkjv@Luke:2:7| and Aleph for strkjv@Matthew:1:25; strkjv@Romans:8:29|. The use of this word does not show what Arius argued that Paul regarded Christ as a creature like "all creation" (\pss ktises\, by metonomy the _act_ regarded as _result_). It is rather the comparative (superlative) force of \prtos\ that is used (first-born of all creation) as in strkjv@Colossians:1:18; strkjv@Romans:8:29; strkjv@Hebrews:1:6; strkjv@12:23; strkjv@Revelation:1:5|. Paul is here refuting the Gnostics who pictured Christ as one of the aeons by placing him before "all creation" (angels and men). Like \eikn\ we find \prtotokos\ in the Alexandrian vocabulary of the \Logos\ teaching (Philo) as well as in the LXX. Paul takes both words to help express the deity of Jesus Christ in his relation to the Father as \eikn\ (Image) and to the universe as \prtotokos\ (First-born).
rwp@Colossians:2:18 @{Rob you of your prize} (\katabrabeuet\). Late and rare compound (\kata, brabeu\, strkjv@Colossians:3:15|) to act as umpire against one, perhaps because of bribery in Demosthenes and Eustathius (two other examples in Preisigke's _Worterbuch_), here only in the N.T. Songs:here it means to decide or give judgment against. The judge at the games is called \brabeus\ and the prize \brabeion\ (1Corinthians:9:24; strkjv@Phillipians:3:14|). It is thus parallel to, but stronger than, \krinet\ in verse 16|. {By a voluntary humility} (\theln en tapeinophrosuni\). Present active participle of \thel\, to wish, to will, but a difficult idiom. Some take it as like an adverb for "wilfully" somewhat like \thelontas\ in strkjv@2Peter:3:5|. Others make it a Hebraism from the LXX usage, "finding pleasure in humility." The Revised Version margin has "of his own mere will, by humility." Hort suggested \en ethelotapeinophrosuni\ (in gratuitous humility), a word that occurs in Basil and made like \ethelothrskia\ in verse 23|. {And worshipping of the angels} (\kai thrskeii tn aggeln\). In strkjv@3:12| humility (\tapeinophrosunn\) is a virtue, but it is linked with worship of the angels which is idolatry and so is probably false humility as in verse 23|. They may have argued for angel worship on the plea that God is high and far removed and so took angels as mediators as some men do today with angels and saints in place of Christ. {Dwelling in the things which he hath seen} (\ha heoraken embateun\). Some MSS. have "not," but not genuine. This verb \embateu\ (from \embats\, stepping in, going in) has given much trouble. Lightfoot has actually proposed \kenembateun\ (a verb that does not exist, though \kenembate\ does occur) with \aira\, to tread on empty air, an ingenious suggestion, but now unnecessary. It is an old word for going in to take possession (papyri examples also). W. M. Ramsay (_Teaching of Paul_, pp. 287ff.) shows from inscriptions in Klaros that the word is used of an initiate in the mysteries who "set foot in" (\enebateusen\) and performed the rest of the rites. Paul is here quoting the very work used of these initiates who "take their stand on" these imagined revelations in the mysteries. {Vainly puffed up} (\eiki phusioumenos\). Present passive participle of \phusio\, late and vivid verb from \phusa\, pair of bellows, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:4:6,18f.; strkjv@8:1|. Powerful picture of the self-conceit of these bombastic Gnostics.
rwp@Ephesians:5:27 @{That he might present} (\hina parastsi\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \paristmi\ (see strkjv@Colossians:1:22| for parallel) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:2| of presenting the bride to the bridegroom. Note both \autos\ (himself) and \heauti\ (to himself). {Glorious} (\endoxon\). Used of splendid clothing in strkjv@Luke:7:25|. {Spot} (\spilos\). Late word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@2Peter:2:13|, but \spilo\, to defile in strkjv@James:3:6; strkjv@Jude:1:23|. {Wrinkle} (\rutida\). Old word from \ru\, to contract, only here in N.T. {But that it should be holy and without blemish} (\all' hina i hagia kai ammos\). Christ's goal for the church, his bride and his body, both negative purity and positive.
rwp@Ephesians:6:4 @{Provoke not to anger} (\m parorgizete\). Rare compound, both N.T. examples (here and strkjv@Romans:10:19|) are quotations from the LXX. The active, as here, has a causative sense. Parallel in sense with \m erethizete\ in strkjv@Colossians:3:21|. Paul here touches the common sin of fathers. {In the chastening and admonition of the Lord} (\en paideii kai nouthesii tou kuriou\). \En\ is the sphere in which it all takes place. There are only three examples in the N.T. of \paideia\, old Greek for training a \pais\ (boy or girl) and so for the general education and culture of the child. Both papyri and inscriptions give examples of this original and wider sense (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). It is possible, as Thayer gives it, that this is the meaning here in strkjv@Ephesians:6:4|. In strkjv@2Timothy:3:16| adults are included also in the use. In strkjv@Hebrews:12:5,7,11| the narrower sense of "chastening" appears which some argue for here. At any rate \nouthesia\ (from \nous, tithmi\), common from Aristophanes on, does have the idea of correction. In N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11; strkjv@Titus:3:10|.
rwp@Galatians:2:2 @{By revelation} (\kata apokalupsin\). In strkjv@Acts:15:2| the church sent them. But surely there is no inconsistency here. {I laid before them} (\anethemn autois\). Second aorist middle indicative of old word \anatithmi\, to put up, to place before, with the dative case. But who were the "them" (\autois\)? Evidently not the private conference for he distinguishes this address from that, "but privately" (\kat' idian\). Just place strkjv@Acts:15:4f.| beside the first clause and it is clear: "I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles," precisely as Luke has recorded. Then came the private conference after the uproar caused by the Judaizers (Acts:15:5|). {Before them who were of repute} (\tois dokousin\). He names three of them (Cephas, James, and John). James the Lord's brother, for the other James is now dead (Acts:12:1f.|). But there were others also, a select group of real leaders. The decision reached by this group would shape the decision of the public conference in the adjourned meeting. Songs:far as we know Paul had not met John before, though he had met Peter and James at the other visit. Lightfoot has much to say about the Big Four (St. Paul and the Three) who here discuss the problems of mission work among Jews and Gentiles. It was of the utmost importance that they should see eye to eye. The Judaizers were assuming that the twelve apostles and James the Lord's brother would side with them against Paul and Barnabas. Peter had already been before the Jerusalem Church for his work in Caesarea (Acts:11:1-18|). James was considered a very loyal Jew. {Lest by any means I should be running or had run in vain} (\m ps eis kenon trech edramon\). Negative purpose with the present subjunctive (\trech\) and then by a sudden change the aorist indicative (\edramon\), as a sort of afterthought or retrospect (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 201; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 988). There are plenty of classical parallels. See also strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:5| for both together again.
rwp@Galatians:4:6 @{Because ye are sons} (\hoti este huioi\). This is the reason for sending forth the Son (4:4| and here). We were "sons" in God's elective purpose and love. \Hoti\ is causal (1Corinthians:12:15; strkjv@Romans:9:7|). {The Spirit of his Son} (\to pneuma tou huioi autou\). The Holy Spirit, called the Spirit of Christ (Romans:8:9f.|), the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:19|). The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son (John:15:26|). {Crying, Abba, Father} (\krazon Abba ho patr\). The participle agrees with \pneuma\ neuter (grammatical gender), not neuter in fact. An old, though rare in present as here, onomatopoetic word to croak as a raven (Theophrastus, like Poe's _The Raven_), any inarticulate cry like "the unuttered groanings" of strkjv@Romans:8:26| which God understands. This cry comes from the Spirit of Christ in our hearts. \Abba\ is the Aramaic word for father with the article and \ho patr\ translates it. The articular form occurs in the vocative as in strkjv@John:20:28|. It is possible that the repetition here and in strkjv@Romans:8:15| may be "a sort of affectionate fondness for the very term that Jesus himself used" (Burton) in the Garden of Gethsemane (Mark:14:36|). The rabbis preserve similar parallels. Most of the Jews knew both Greek and Aramaic. But there remains the question why Jesus used both in his prayer. Was it not natural for both words to come to him in his hour of agony as in his childhood? The same thing may be true here in Paul's case.
rwp@Hebrews:1:3 @{Being} (\n\). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of \eimi\) in contrast with \genomenos\ in verse 4| like \n\ in strkjv@John:1:1| (in contrast with \egeneto\ in strkjv@1:14|) and like \huparchn\ and \genomenos\ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {The effulgence of his glory} (\apaugasma ts doxs\). The word \apaugasma\, late substantive from \apaugaz\, to emit brightness (\aug, augaz\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4|), here only in the N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:26 and in Philo. It can mean either reflected brightness, refulgence (Calvin, Thayer) or effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold. Both senses are true of Christ in his relation to God as Jesus shows in plain language in strkjv@John:12:45; strkjv@14:9|. "The writer is using metaphors which had already been applied to Wisdom and the Logos" (Moffatt). The meaning "effulgence" suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John:1:1|), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6|. {The very image of his substance} (\charaktr ts hupostases\). \Charaktr\ is an old word from \charass\, to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending \=tr\) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by \charagma\ (Acts:17:29; strkjv@Revelation:13:16f.|). Menander had already used (Moffatt) \charaktr\ in the sense of our "character." The word occurs in the inscriptions for "person" as well as for "exact reproduction" of a person. The word \hupostasis\ for the being or essence of God "is a philosophical rather than a religious term" (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In strkjv@11:1| \hypostasis\ is like the "title-deed" idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| in his controversy with Arius. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul's simpler phrase \morph theou\ (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of \Logos\ in strkjv@John:1:1-18| is parallel to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4|. {And upholding} (\phern te\). Present active participle of \pher\ closely connected with \n\ (being) by \te\ and like strkjv@Colossians:1:17| in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented. {By the word of his power} (\ti rmati ts dunames autou\). Instrumental case of \rma\ (word). See strkjv@11:3| for \rmati theou\ (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here \autou\ refers to God's Son as in strkjv@1:2|. {Purification of sins} (\katharismon tn hamartin\). \Katharismos\ is from \kathariz\, to cleanse (Matthew:8:3; strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Job:7:21|. Note middle participle \poisamenos\ like \heuramenos\ in strkjv@9:12|. This is the first mention of the priestly work of Christ, the keynote of this Epistle. {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). First aorist active of \kathiz\, "took his seat," a formal and dignified act. {Of the Majesty on high} (\ts megalosuns en hupslois\). Late word from \megas\, only in LXX (Deuteronomy:32:3; strkjv@2Samuel:7:23|, etc.), Aristeas, strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Jude:1:25|. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John:17:5|). The phrase \en hupslois\ occurs in the Psalms (Psalms:93:4|), here only in N.T., elsewhere \en hupsistois\ in the highest (Matthew:21:9; strkjv@Luke:2:14|) or \en tois epouraniois\ in the heavenlies (Ephesians:1:3,20|). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God.
rwp@Hebrews:1:6 @{And when he again bringeth in} (\hotan de palin eisagagi\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \eisag\. If \palin\ is taken with \eisagagi\, the reference is to the Second Coming as in strkjv@9:28|. If \palin\ merely introduces another quotation (Psalms:97:7|) parallel to \kai palin\ in verse 5|, the reference is to the incarnation when the angels did worship the Child Jesus (Luke:2:13f.|). There is no way to decide certainly about it. {The first-born} (\ton prtotokon\). See strkjv@Psalms:89:28|. For this compound adjective applied to Christ in relation to the universe see strkjv@Colossians:1:15|, to other men, strkjv@Romans:8:29; strkjv@Colossians:1:18|, to the other children of Mary, strkjv@Luke:2:7|; here it is used absolutely. {The world} (\tn oikoumenn\). "The inhabited earth." See strkjv@Acts:17:6|. {Let worship} (\proskunsatsan\). Imperative first aorist active third plural of \proskune\, here in the full sense of worship, not mere reverence or courtesy. This quotation is from the LXX of strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:43|, but is not in the Hebrew, though most of the LXX MSS. (except F) have \huioi theou\, but the substance does occur also in strkjv@Psalms:97:7| with \hoi aggeloi autou\.
rwp@Hebrews:4:9 @{A sabbath rest} (\sabbatismos\). Late word from \sabbatiz\ (Exodus:16:30|) to keep the Sabbath, apparently coined by the author (a doubtful passage in Plutarch). Here it is parallel with \katapausis\ (cf. strkjv@Revelation:14:13|). {For the people of God} (\ti lai tou theou\). Dative case of blessed personal interest to the true Israel (Galatians:6:16|).
rwp@Hebrews:7:3 @{Without father, without mother, without genealogy} (\apatr, amtr, agenealogtos\). Alliteration like strkjv@Romans:1:30|, the first two old words, the third coined by the author (found nowhere else) and meaning simply "devoid of any genealogy." The argument is that from silence, made much of by Philo, but not to be pressed. The record in Genesis tells nothing of any genealogy. Melchizedek stands alone. He is not to be understood as a miraculous being without birth or death. Melchizedek has been made more mysterious than he is by reading into this interpretation what is not there. {Made like} (\aphmoimenos\). Perfect passive participle of \aphomoio\, old verb, to produce a facsimile or copy, only here in N.T. The likeness is in the picture drawn in Genesis, not in the man himself. Such artificial interpretation does not amount to proof, but only serves as a parallel or illustration. {Unto the Son of God} (\ti huii tou theou\). Associative instrumental case of \huios\. {Abideth a priest} (\menei hiereus\). According to the record in Genesis, the only one in his line just as Jesus stands alone, but with the difference that Jesus continues priest in fact in heaven. {Continually} (\eis to dinekes\). Old phrase (for the continuity) like \eis ton aina\, in N.T. only in Hebrews (7:3; strkjv@10:1,14,21|).
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@Info_James @ THE STYLE James assumes the doctrinal features of Christianity, but he is concerned mainly with the ethical and social aspects of the gospel that Jewish followers of Christ may square their lives with the gospel which they believe and profess. But this fact does not justify Luther in calling the Epistle of James "a veritable Epistle of straw." Luther imagined that James contradicted Paul's teaching of justification by faith. That is not true and the criticism of Luther is unjust. We shall see that, though James and Paul use the same words (faith, works, justify), they mean different things by them. It is possible that both Paul and Peter had read the Epistle of James, though by no means certain. M. Jones (_New Testament in the Twentieth Century_, p. 316) thinks that the author was familiar with Stoic philosophy. This is also possible, though he may have learned it only indirectly through the Wisdom of Solomon and Philo. What is true is that the author writes in the easy and accurate _Koin_ Greek of a cultivated Jew (the literary _Koin_, not the vernacular), though not the artificial or stilted language of a professional stylist. Principal Patrick (_James the Lord's Brother_, p. 298) holds that he "had a wide knowledge of Classical Greek." This does not follow, though he does use the manner "of the Hellenistic diatribe" (Ropes, _Int. and Crit. Comm_., p. 19) so common at that time. Ropes (pp. 10-22) points out numerous parallels between James and the popular moral addresses of the period, familiar since the days of Socrates and at its height in Seneca and Epictetus. The use of an imaginary interlocutor is one instance (James:2:18f.; strkjv@5:13f.|) as is the presence of paradox (James:1:2,10; strkjv@2:5|; etc.). But the style of James is even more kin to that seen in the Jewish wisdom literature like Proverbs, the Wisdom of Solomon, etc. It is thus both tract and Epistle, a brief Christian sermon on a high plane for a noble purpose. But it is all natural and not artificial. The metaphors are many, but brief and remind one constantly of the Master's use of them in the Sermon on the Mount. Did not Mary the mother of Jesus and James make frequent use of such homely parables? The author shows acquaintance with the LXX, but there are few Hebraisms in the language, though the style is Hebraic, as is the whole tone of the book (Hebraic and Christian). "The style is especially remarkable for constant hidden allusions to our Lord's sayings, such as we find in the first three Gospels" (Hort).
rwp@James:1:25 @{He that looketh into} (\ho parakupsas\). First aorist active articular participle of \parakupt\, old verb, to stoop and look into (John:20:5,11|), to gaze carefully by the side of, to peer into or to peep into (1Peter:1:12|). Here the notion of beside (\para\) or of stooping (\kupt\) is not strong. Sometimes, as Hort shows, the word means only a cursory glance, but the contrast with verse 24| seems to preclude that here. {The perfect law} (\nomon teleion\). For \teleion\ see strkjv@1:17|. See strkjv@Romans:7:12| for Paul's idea of the law of God. James here refers to the word of truth (1:18|), the gospel of grace (Galatians:6:2; strkjv@Romans:12:2|). {The law of liberty} (\ton ts eleutherias\). "That of liberty," explaining why it is "perfect" (2:12| also), rests on the work of Christ, whose truth sets us free (John:8:32; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:16; strkjv@Romans:8:2|). {And so continueth} (\kai parameinas\). First aorist active articular participle again of \paramen\, parallel with \parakupsas\. \Paramen\ is to stay beside, and see strkjv@Phillipians:1:25| for contrast with the simplex \men\. {Being} (\genomenos\). Rather, "having become" (second aorist middle participle of \ginomai\ to become). {Not a hearer that forgetteth} (\ouk akroats epilsmons\). "Not a hearer of forgetfulness" (descriptive genitive, marked by forgetfulness). \Epilsmon\ is a late and rare word (from \epilsmn\, forgetful, from \epilanthomai\, to forget, as in verse 24|), here only in N.T. {But a doer that worketh} (\alla poits ergou\). "But a doer of work," a doer marked by work (descriptive genitive \ergou\), not by mere listening or mere talk. {In his doing} (\en ti poisei autou\). Another beatitude with \makarios\ as in strkjv@1:12|, like the Beatitudes in strkjv@Matthew:5:3-12|. \Poisis\ is an old word (from \poie\ for the act of doing), only here in N.T.
rwp@James:2:10 @{Whosoever shall keep} (\hostis trsi\). Indefinite relative clause with \hostis\ and aorist active subjunctive of \tre\, old verb, to guard (from \tros\ guarding), as in strkjv@Matthew:27:36|, without \an\ (though often used, but only one example of modal \ean=an\ in James, viz., strkjv@4:4|). This modal \an\ (\ean\) merely interprets the sentence as either more indefinite or more definite (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 957f.). {And yet stumble in one point} (\ptaisi de en heni\). First aorist active subjunctive also of \ptai\, old verb, to trip, as in strkjv@3:2; strkjv@Romans:11:11|. "It is incipient falling" (Hort). {He is become} (\gegonen\). Second perfect indicative of \ginomai\, "he has become" by that one stumble. {Guilty of all} (\pantn enochos\). Genitive of the crime with \enochos\, old adjective from \enech\ (to hold on or in), held in, as in strkjv@Mark:3:29|. This is law. To be a lawbreaker one does not have to violate all the laws, but he must keep all the law (\holon ton nomon\) to be a law-abiding citizen, even laws that one does not like. See strkjv@Matthew:5:18f.| for this same principle. There is Talmudic parallel: "If a man do all, but omit one, he is guilty for all and each." This is a pertinent principle also for those who try to save themselves. But James is urging obedience to all God's laws.
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@John:8:23 @{Ye are from beneath} (\humeis ek tn kat\). This language, peculiar to John, could take up the idea in Josephus that these rabbis came from Gehenna whence they will go as children of the devil (8:44|), but the use of \ek tou kosmou toutou\ ("of this world" in origin) as parallel to what we have here seems to prove that the contrast between \kat\ and \an\ here is between the earthly (sensual) and the heavenly as in strkjv@James:3:15-17|. See also strkjv@Colossians:3:1|. This is the only use of \kat\ in John (except strkjv@8:6|). These proud rabbis had their origin in this world of darkness (1:9|) with all its limitations. {I am from above} (\eg ek tn an eimi\). The contrast is complete in origin and character, already stated in strkjv@3:31|, and calculated to intensify their anger.
rwp@John:17:8 @{The words} (\ta rmata\). Plural, each word of God, as in strkjv@3:34|, and of Christ (5:47; strkjv@6:63,68|), while the singular (\ton logon sou\) in verses 6,14| views God's message as a whole. {Knew} (\egnsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\ like \elabon\ in contrast with \egnkan\ (perfect) in verse 7|. They definitely "received and recognized truly" (\alths\). There was comfort to Christ in this fact. {They believed} (\episteusan\). Another aorist parallel with \elabon\ and \egnsan\. The disciples believed in Christ's mission from the Father (John:6:69; strkjv@Matthew:16:16|). Note \apesteilas\ here as in verse 3|. Christ is God's {Apostle} to man (Hebrews:3:1|). This statement, like a solemn refrain (\Thou didst send me\), occurs five times in this prayer (verses 8,18,21,23,25|).
rwp@John:18:25 @{Was standing and warming himself} (\n hests kai thermainomenos\). Two periphrastic imperfects precisely as in verse 18|, vivid renewal of the picture drawn there. John alone gives the examination of Jesus by Annas (18:19-24|) which he places between the first and the second denials by Peter. Each of the Four Gospels gives three denials, but it is not possible to make a clear parallel as probably several people joined in each time. This time there was an hour's interval (Luke:22:59|). The question and answer are almost identical with verse 17| and "put in a form which almost _suggested_ that Peter should say 'No'" (Bernard), a favourite device of the devil in making temptation attractive.
rwp@Info_Jude:@ SPECIAL BOOKS ON JUDE (Apart from those on II Peter or the Catholic Epistles) Chase, F. H., _Jude:in Hastings D B_ (1899). Ermoni, V., _L'epitre de Jude_ (1903, in Vigoroux, Diction- naire de la Bible). Georchin, B., _Der Brief Judas_ (1901). Kasteren, J. P., _Deuteronomy:brief uan den apostel Judas_ (1916). Maier, F., _Der Judasbrief_ (1906). Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of Jude_ (in Expositor's Greek Testament, 1910). Plummer, A., _St. James and St. Jude_ (Expositor's Bible). Rampf, M. F., _Der Brief Juda_ (1854). Stier, R., _Der Brief Judas, des Bruders des Herrn_ (1850). Wandel, G., _Der Brief des Judas_ (1898). strkjv@Jude:1:1 @{Servant} (\doulos\). Precisely as James (James:1:1|), only James added \kuriou\ (Lord). {Brother of James} (\adelphos Iakbou\). Thus Jude:identifies himself. But not the "Judas of James" (Luke:6:16; strkjv@Acts:1:13|). {To them that are called} (\tois--kltois\). But this translation (treating \kltois\ as a substantive like strkjv@Romans:1:6; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:24|) is by no means certain as two participles come in between \tois\ and \kltois\. \Kltois\ may be in the predicate position (being called), not attributive. But see strkjv@1Peter:1:1|. {Beloved in God the Father} (\en thei patri gapmenois\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa\, but no precise parallel to this use of \en\ with \agapa\. {Kept for Jesus Christ} (\Isou Christi tetrmenois\). Perfect passive participle again with dative, unless it is the instrumental, "kept by Jesus Christ," a quite possible interpretation.
rwp@Info_Luke @ THE CHARACTER OF THE BOOK Literary charm is here beyond dispute. It is a book that only a man with genuine culture and literary genius could write. It has all the simple grace of Mark and Matthew plus an indefinable quality not in these wonderful books. There is a delicate finish of detail and proportion of parts that give the balance and poise that come only from full knowledge of the subject, the chief element in a good style according to Dr. James Stalker. This scientific physician, this man of the schools, this converted Gentile, this devoted friend of Paul, comes to the study of the life of Christ with a trained intellect, with an historian's method of research, with a physician's care in diagnosis and discrimination, with a charm of style all his own, with reverence for and loyalty to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. One could not afford to give up either of the Four Gospels. They each supplement the other in a wonderful way. John's Gospel is the greatest book in all the world, reaching the highest heights of all. But if we had only Luke's Gospel, we should have an adequate portrait of Jesus Christ as Son of God and Son of Man. If Mark's is the Gospel for the Romans and Matthew's for the Jews, the Gospel of Luke is for the Gentile world. He shows the sympathy of Jesus for the poor and the outcast. Luke understands women and children and so is the universal Gospel of mankind in all phases and conditions. It is often called the Gospel of womanhood, of infancy, of prayer, of praise. We have in Luke the first Christian hymns. With Luke we catch some glimpses of the child Jesus for which we are grateful. Luke was a friend and follower of Paul, and verbal parallels with Paul's Epistles do occur, but there is no Pauline propaganda in the Gospel as Moffatt clearly shows (_Intr. to Lit. of the N.T._, p. 281). The Prologue is in literary _Koin_ and deserves comparison with those in any Greek and Latin writers. His style is versatile and is often coloured by his source. He was a great reader of the Septuagint as is shown by occasional Hebraisms evidently due to reading that translation Greek. He has graciousness and a sense of humour as McLachlan and Ragg show. Every really great man has a saving sense of humour as Jesus himself had. Ramsay dares to call Luke, as shown by the Gospel and Acts, the greatest of all historians not even excepting Thucydides. Ramsay has done much to restore Luke to his rightful place in the estimation of modern scholars. Some German critics used to cite strkjv@Luke:2:1-7| as a passage containing more historical blunders than any similar passage in any historian. The story of how papyri and inscriptions have fully justified Luke in every statement here made is carefully worked out by Ramsay in his various books, especially in _The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament_. The main feature of this proof appears also in my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_. Songs:many items, where Luke once stood alone, have been confirmed by recent discoveries that the burden of proof now rests on those who challenge Luke in those cases where he still stands alone.
rwp@Luke:1:47 @{Hath rejoiced} (\galliasen\). This is aorist active indicative. Greek tenses do not correspond to those in English. The verb \agallia\ is a Hellenistic word from the old Greek \agall\. It means to exult. See the substantive \agalliasis\ in strkjv@Luke:1:14,44|. Mary is not excited like Elisabeth, but breathes a spirit of composed rapture. {My spirit} (\to pneuma mou\). One need not press unduly the difference between "soul" (\psuch\) in verse 46| and "spirit" here. Bruce calls them synonyms in parallel clauses. Vincent argues that the soul is the principle of individuality while the spirit is the point of contact between God and man. It is doubtful, however, if the trichotomous theory of man (body, soul, and spirit) is to be insisted on. It is certain that we have an inner spiritual nature for which various words are used in strkjv@Mark:12:30|. Even the distinction between intellect, emotions, and will is challenged by some psychologists. {God my Saviour} (\ti thei ti sotri mou\). Article with each substantive. God is called Saviour in the O.T. (Deuteronomy:32:15, strkjv@Psalms:24:5; strkjv@95:1|).
rwp@Luke:4:2 @{Being tempted} (\peirazomenos\). Present passive participle and naturally parallel with the imperfect passive \geto\ (was led) in verse 1|. This is another instance of poor verse division which should have come at the end of the sentence. See on ¯Matthew:4:1; strkjv@Mark:1:13| for the words "tempt" and "devil." The devil challenged the Son of man though also the Son of God. It was a contest between Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, and the slanderer of men. The devil had won with Adam and Eve. He has hopes of triumph over Jesus. The story of this conflict is given only in strkjv@Matthew:4:1-11; strkjv@Luke:4:1-13|. There is a mere mention of it in strkjv@Mark:1:12f|. Songs:then here is a specimen of the Logia of Jesus (Q), a non-Markan portion of Matthew and Luke, the earliest document about Christ. The narrative could come ultimately only from Christ himself. It is noteworthy that it bears all the marks of the high conception of Jesus as the Son of God found in the Gospel of John and in Paul and Hebrews, the rest of the New Testament in fact, for Mark, Matthew, Luke, Acts, Peter, and Jude:follow in this same strain. The point is that modern criticism has revealed the Messianic consciousness of Jesus as God's Son at his Baptism and in his Temptations at the very beginning of his ministry and in the oldest known documents about Christ (The Logia, Mark's Gospel). {He did eat nothing} (\ouk ephagen ouden\). Second aorist (constative) active indicative of the defective verb \esthi\. Mark does not give the fast. strkjv@Matthew:4:2| has the aorist active participle \nsteusas\ which usually means a religious fast for purposes of devotion. That idea is not excluded by Luke's words. The entrance of Jesus upon his Messianic ministry was a fit time for this solemn and intense consecration. This mental and spiritual strain would naturally take away the appetite and there was probably nothing at hand to eat. The weakness from the absence of food gave the devil his special opportunity to tempt Jesus which he promptly seized. {When they were completed} (\suntelestheisn autn\). Genitive absolute with the first aorist passive participle feminine plural because \hemern\ (days) is feminine. According to Luke the hunger (\epeinasen\, became hungry, ingressive aorist active indicative) came at the close of the forty days as in strkjv@Matthew:4:2|.
rwp@Luke:4:31 @{Came down} (\katlthen\). strkjv@Mark:1:21| has the historical present, {they go into} (\eisporeuontai\). Capernaum (Tell Hum) is now the headquarters of the Galilean ministry, since Nazareth has rejected Jesus. strkjv@Luke:4:31-37| is parallel with strkjv@Mark:1:21-28| which he manifestly uses. It is the first of Christ's miracles which they give. {Was teaching them} (\n didaskn autous\). Periphrastic imperfect. Mark has \edidasken\ first and then \en didaskn\. "Them" here means the people present in the synagogue on the sabbath, construction according to sense as in strkjv@Mark:1:22|.
rwp@Luke:4:38 @{He rose up} (\anastas\). Second aorist active participle of \anistmi\, a common verb. B. Weiss adds here "from the teacher's seat." Either from his seat or merely leaving the synagogue. This incident of the healing of Peter's mother-in-law is given in strkjv@Mark:1:29-34| and strkjv@Matthew:8:14-17|, which see for details. {Into the house of Simon} (\eis tn oikian Simnos\). "Peter's house" (Matthew:8:14|). "The house of Simon and Andrew" (Mark:1:29|). Paul's reference to Peter's wife (1Corinthians:9:5|) is pertinent. They lived together in Capernaum. This house came also to be the Capernaum home of Jesus. {Simon's wife's mother} (\penthera tou Simnos\). The word \penthera\ for mother-in-law is old and well established in usage. Besides the parallel passages (Mark:1:30; strkjv@Matthew:8:14; strkjv@Luke:4:38|) it occurs in the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:12:53|. The corresponding word \pentheros\, father-in-law, occurs in strkjv@John:18:13| alone in the N.T. {Was holden with a great fever} (\n sunechomen pureti megali\). Periphrastic imperfect passive, the analytical tense accenting the continuous fever, perhaps chronic and certainly severe. Luke employs this verb nine times and only three others in the N.T. (Matthew:4:24| passive with diseases here; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14| active; strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| passive). In strkjv@Acts:28:8| the passive "with dysentery" is like the construction here and is a common one in Greek medical writers as in Greek literature generally. Luke uses the passive with "fear," strkjv@Luke:8:37|, the active for holding the hands over the ears (Acts:7:57|) and for pressing one or holding together (Luke:8:45; strkjv@19:43; strkjv@22:63|), the direct middle for holding oneself to preaching (Acts:18:5|). It is followed here by the instrumental case. Hobart (_Medical Language of Luke_, p. 3) quotes Galen as dividing fevers into "great" (\megaloi\) and "small" (\smikroi\).
rwp@Luke:8:32 @{A herd of many swine} (\agel choirn hikann\). Word {herd} (\agel\) old as Homer, but in N.T. only here and parallels (Mark:5:11; strkjv@Matthew:8:30|). Luke shows his fondness for adjective \hikanos\ here again (see verse 27|) where Mark has \megal\ and Matthew \polln\.
rwp@Luke:9:16 @{The five... the two} (\tous pente... tous duo\). Pointing back to verse 13|, fine example of the Greek article. {And gave} (\kai edidou\). Imperfect active of \didmi\, kept on giving. This picturesque imperfect is preceded by the aorist \kateklasen\ (brake), a single act. This latter verb in the N.T. only here and the parallel in strkjv@Mark:6:41|, though common enough in ancient Greek. We say "break off" where here the Greek has "break down" (or thoroughly), perfective use of \kata\.
rwp@Luke:9:19 @{That I am} (\me einai\). Accusative and infinitive in indirect assertion, a common Greek idiom. strkjv@Matthew:16:13| for "I" has "the Son of man" as identical in the consciousness of Christ. The various opinions of men about Jesus here run parallel to the rumours heard by Herod (verses 8,9|).
rwp@Luke:9:22 @{Rejected} (\apodokimasthnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \apodokimaz\, to reject after trial. {The third day} (\ti triti hmeri\). Locative case of time as in strkjv@Matthew:16:21|. Here in the parallel passage strkjv@Mark:8:31| has "after three days" (\meta treis hmeras\) in precisely the same sense. That is to say, "after three days" is just a free way of saying "on the third day" and cannot mean "on the fourth day" if taken too literally. For discussion of this plain prediction of the death of Christ with various details see discussion on strkjv@Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Mark:8:31|. It was a melancholy outlook that depressed the disciples as Mark and Matthew show in the protest of Peter and his rebuke.
rwp@Luke:12:2 @{Covered up} (\sugkekalummenon estin\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \sugkalupt\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T., to cover up on all sides and so completely. Verses 2-9| here are parallel with strkjv@Matthew:10:26-33| spoken to the Twelve on their tour of Galilee, illustrating again how often Jesus repeated his sayings unless we prefer to say that he never did so and that the Gospels have hopelessly jumbled them as to time and place. See the passage in Matthew for discussion of details.
rwp@Luke:12:39 @{The thief} (\ho klepts\). The change here almost makes a new parable to illustrate the other, the parable of the housebreaking (verses 39,40|) to illustrate the parable of the waiting servants (35-38|). This same language appears in strkjv@Matthew:24:43f|. "The Master returning from a wedding is replaced by a thief whose study it is to come to the house he means to plunder at an unexpected time" (Bruce). The parallel in strkjv@Matthew:24:43-51| with strkjv@Luke:12:39-46| does not have the interruption by Peter. {He would have watched} (\egrgorsen an\). Apodosis of second-class condition, determined as unfulfilled, made plain by use of \an\ with aorist indicative which is not repeated with \ouk aphken\ (first aorist active indicative of \aphimi\, \k\ aorist), though it is sometimes repeated (Matthew:24:43|).
rwp@Luke:12:46 @{Shall cut him asunder} (\dichotomsei\). An old and somewhat rare word from \dichotomos\ and that from \dicha\ and \temn\, to cut, to cut in two. Used literally here. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:24:51|. {With the unfaithful} (\meta tn apistn\). Not here "the unbelieving" though that is a common meaning of \apistos\ (\a\ privative and \pistos\, from \peith\), but the unreliable, the untrustworthy. Here strkjv@Matthew:24:51| has "with the hypocrites," the same point. The parallel with strkjv@Matthew:24:43-51| ends here. strkjv@Matthew:24:51| adds the saying about the wailing and the gnashing of teeth. Clearly there Luke places the parable of the wise steward in this context while Matthew has it in the great eschatological discourse. Once again we must either think that Jesus repeated the parable or that one of the writers has misplaced it. Luke alone preserves what he gives in verses 47,48|.
rwp@Luke:14:12 @{A dinner or a supper} (\ariston deipnon\). More exactly, a breakfast or a dinner with distinction between them as already shown. This is a parable for the host as one had just been given for the guests, though Luke does not term this a parable. {Call not} (\m phnei\). \M\ and the present imperative active, prohibiting the habit of inviting only friends. It is the _exclusive_ invitation of such guests that Jesus condemns. There is a striking parallel to this in Plato's _Phaedrus_ 233. {Recompense} (\antapodoma\). In the form of a return invitation. Like \anti\ in "bid thee again" (\antikalessin\).
rwp@Luke:22:6 @{Consented} (\exmologsen\). Old verb, but the ancients usually used the simple form for promise or consent rather than the compound. This is the only instance of this sense in the N.T. It is from \homologos\ (\homos\, same, and \leg\, to say), to say the same thing with another and so agree. {Opportunity} (\eukarian\). From \eukairos\ (\eu, kairos\), a good chance. Old word, but in the N.T. only here and parallel passage strkjv@Matthew:26:16|. {In the absence of the multitude} (\ater ochlou\). \Ater\ is an old preposition, common in the poets, but rare in prose. Also in verse 35|. It means "without," "apart from," like \chris\. The point of Judas was just this. He would get Jesus into the hands of the Sanhedrin during the feast in spite of the crowd. It was necessary to avoid tumult (Matthew:26:5|) because of the popularity of Jesus.
rwp@Mark:2:23 @{Through the cornfields} (\dia tn sporimn\). See on ¯Matthew:12:1|. Songs:Matt. and strkjv@Luke:6:1|. But Mark uses \paraporeuesthai\, to go along beside, unless \diaporeuesthai\ (BCD) is accepted. Perhaps now on the edge, now within the grain. Mark uses also \hodon poiein\, to {make a way} like the Latin _iter facere_, as if through the standing grain, {plucking the ears} (\tillontes tous stachuas\). Work of preparing food the rabbis called it. The margin of the Revised Version has it correctly: They began to make their way plucking the ears of corn (grain, wheat or barley, we should say). See on ¯Matthew:12:1-8| for discussion of this passage, parallel also in strkjv@Luke:6:15|.
rwp@Mark:15:41 @{Followed him and ministered unto him} (\kolouthoun kai dikonoun auti\). Two imperfects describing the long Galilean ministry of these three women and many other women in Galilee (Luke:8:1-3|) who came up with him (\hai sunanabsai auti\) to Jerusalem. This summary description in Mark is paralleled in strkjv@Matthew:27:55f.| and strkjv@Luke:23:49|. These faithful women were last at the Cross as they stood afar and saw the dreadful end to all their hopes.
rwp@Matthew:7:12 @{That men should do unto you} (\hina poisin hmn hoi anthrpoi\). Luke (Luke:6:31|) puts the Golden Rule parallel with strkjv@Matthew:5:42|. The negative form is in Tobit strkjv@4:15. It was used by Hillel, Philo, Isocrates, Confucius. "The Golden Rule is the distilled essence of that 'fulfilment' (5:17|) which is taught in the sermon" (McNeile). Jesus puts it in positive form.
rwp@Matthew:7:16 @{By their fruits ye shall know them} (\apo tn karpn autn epignsesthe\). From their fruits you will recognize them." The verb "know " (\ginsk\) has \epi\ added, fully know. The illustrations from the trees and vines have many parallels in ancient writers.
rwp@Matthew:13:11 @{To know the mysteries} (\gnnai ta mustria\). Second aorist active infinitive of \ginsk\. The word \mustrion\ is from \musts\, one initiated, and that from \mue\ (\mu\), to close or shut (Latin, _mutus_). The mystery-religions of the east had all sorts of secrets and signs as secret societies do today. But those initiated knew them. Songs:the disciples have been initiated into the secrets of the kingdom of heaven. Paul will use it freely of the mystery once hidden, but now revealed, now made known in Christ (Romans:16:25; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7|, etc.). In strkjv@Phillipians:4:12| Paul says: "I have learned the secret or been initiated" (\memumai\). Songs:Jesus here explains that his parables are open to the disciples, but shut to the Pharisees with their hostile minds. In the Gospels \mustrion\ is used only here and in the parallel passages (Mark:4:11; strkjv@Luke:8:10|).
rwp@Matthew:13:13 @{Because seeing} (\hoti blepontes\). In the parallel passages in strkjv@Mark:4:12| and strkjv@Luke:8:10| we find \hina\ with the subjunctive. This does not necessarily mean that in Mark and Luke \hina=hoti\ with the causal sense, though a few rare instances of such usage may be found in late Greek. For a discussion of the problem see my chapter on "The Causal Use of _Hina_" in _Studies in Early Christianity_ (1928) edited by Prof. S.J. Case. Here in Matthew we have first "an adaptation of strkjv@Isaiah:6:9f.| which is quoted in full in v. 14f.|" (McNeile). Thus Matthew presents "a striking paradox, 'though they see, they do not (really) see'" (McNeile). Cf. strkjv@John:9:41|. The idiom here in Matthew gives no trouble save in comparison with Mark and Luke which will be discussed in due turn. The form \suniousin\ is an omega verb form (\suni\) rather than the \mi\ verb (\sunimi\) as is common in the _Koin_.
rwp@Matthew:21:5 @{The daughter of Zion} (\ti thugatri Sin\). Jerusalem as in strkjv@Isaiah:22:4| (daughter of my people). Songs:Babylon (Isaiah:47:1|), daughter of Tyre for Tyre (Psalms:45:12|). {Riding} (\epibebks\). Perfect active participle of \epibain\, "having gone upon." {And upon a colt the foal of an ass} (\kai epi plon huion hupozugiou\). These words give trouble if \kai\ is here taken to mean "and." Fritzsche argues that Jesus rode alternately upon each animal, a possible, but needless interpretation. In the Hebrew it means by common Hebrew parallelism "upon an ass, even upon a colt." That is obviously the meaning here in Matthew. The use of \hupozugiou\ (a beast of burden, under a yoke) for ass is common in the LXX and in the papyri (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_ p. 161).
rwp@Matthew:27:9 @{By Jeremiah the prophet} (\dia Ieremiou\). This quotation comes mainly from strkjv@Zechariah:11:13| though not in exact language. In strkjv@Jeremiah:18:18| the prophet tells of a visit to a potter's house and in strkjv@Jeremiah:32:6ff.| of the purchase of a field. It is in Zechariah that the thirty pieces of silver are mentioned. Many theories are offered for the combination of Zechariah and Jeremiah and attributing it all to Jeremiah as in strkjv@Mark:1:2f.| the quotation from Isaiah and Malachi is referred wholly to Isaiah as the more prominent of the two. Broadus and McNeile give a full discussion of the various theories from a mere mechanical slip to the one just given above. Matthew has here (27:10|) "the field of the potter" (\eis ton agron tou kerames\) for "the potter the house of the Lord" in strkjv@Zechariah:11:13|. That makes it more parallel with the language of strkjv@Matthew:27:7|.
rwp@Matthew:27:17 @{Barabbas or Jesus which is called Christ?} (\Barabbn Isoun ton legomenon Christon;\). Pilate was catching at straws or seeking any loophole to escape condemning a harmless lunatic or exponent of a superstitious cult such as he deemed Jesus to be, certainly in no political sense a rival of Caesar. The Jews interpreted "Christ" for Pilate to be a claim to be King of the Jews in opposition to Caesar, "a most unprincipled proceeding" (Bruce). Songs:he bethought him of the time-honoured custom at the passover of releasing to the people "a prisoner whom they wished" (\desmion hon thelon\). No parallel case has been found, but Josephus mentions the custom (_Ant_. xx. 9,3). Barabbas was for some reason a popular hero, a notable (\epismon\), if not notorious, prisoner, leader of an insurrection or revolution (Mark:15:7|) probably against Rome, and so guilty of the very crime that they tried to fasten on Jesus who only claimed to be king in the spiritual sense of the spiritual kingdom. Songs:Pilate unwittingly pitted against each other two prisoners who represented the antagonistic forces of all time. It is an elliptical structure in the question, "whom do you wish that I release?" (\tina thelete apolus;\), either two questions in one (asyndeton) or the ellipse of \hina\ before \apolus\. See the same idiom in verse 21|. But Pilate's question tested the Jews as well as himself. It tests all men today. Some manuscripts add the name Jesus to Barabbas and that makes it all the sharper. Jesus Barabbas or Jesus Christ?
rwp@Romans:1:18 @{For the wrath of God is revealed} (\apokaluptetai gar org theou\). Note in Romans Paul's use of \gar\, now argumentative, now explanatory, now both as here. There is a parallel and antecedent revelation (see verse 17|) of God's wrath corresponding to the revelation of God's righteousness, this an unwritten revelation, but plainly made known. \Org\ is from \orga\, to teem, to swell. It is the temper of God towards sin, not rage, but the wrath of reason and law (Shedd). The revelation of God's righteousness in the gospel was necessary because of the failure of men to attain it without it, for God's wrath justly rested upon all both Gentiles (1:18-32|) and Jews (2:1-3:20|). {Ungodliness} (\asebeian\). Irreligion, want of reverence toward God, old word (cf. strkjv@2Timothy:2:16|). {Unrighteousness} (\adikian\). Lack (\a\ privative and \dik\) of right conduct toward men, injustice (Romans:9:14; strkjv@Luke:18:6|). This follows naturally from irreverence. The basis of ethical conduct rests on the nature of God and our attitude toward him, otherwise the law of the jungle (cf. Nietzsche, "might makes right"). {Hold down the truth} (\tn altheian katechontn\). Truth (\altheia, alths\, from \a\ privative and \lth\ or \lanthan\, to conceal) is out in the open, but wicked men, so to speak, put it in a box and sit on the lid and "hold it down in unrighteousness." Their evil deeds conceal the open truth of God from men. Cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:6f.| for this use of \katech\, to hinder.
rwp@Romans:4:11 @{The sign of circumcision} (\smeion peritoms\). It is the genitive of apposition, circumcision being the sign. {A seal of the righteousness of the faith} (\sphragida ts dikaiosuns ts pistes\). \Sphragis\ is old word for the seal placed on books (Revelation:5:1|), for a signet-ring (Revelation:7:2|), the stamp made by the seal (2Timothy:2:19|), that by which anything is confirmed (1Corinthians:9:2|) as here. The circumcision did not convey the righteousness, but only gave outward confirmation. It came by faith and "the faith which he had while in uncircumcision" (\ts en ti akrobustii\), "the in the state of uncircumcision faith." Whatever parallel exists between baptism and circumcision as here stated by Paul argues for faith before baptism and for baptism as the sign and seal of the faith already had before baptism. {That he might be} (\eis to einai auton\). This idiom may be God's purpose (contemplated result) as in \eis to logisthnai\ below, or even actual result (so that he was) as in strkjv@1:20|. {Though they be in uncircumcision} (\di' akrobustias\). Simply, "of those who believe while in the condition of uncircumcision."
rwp@Romans:5:14 @{Even over them that had not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression} (\kai epi tous m hamartsantas epi ti homoimati ts parabases Adam\). Adam violated an express command of God and Moses gave the law of God clearly. And yet sin and death followed all from Adam on till Moses, showing clearly that the sin of Adam brought terrible consequences upon the race. Death has come upon infants and idiots also as a result of sin, but one understands Paul to mean that they are not held responsible by the law of conscience. {A figure} (\tupos\). See on ¯Acts:7:43; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:10:6| for this word. Adam is a type of Christ in holding a relation to those affected by the headship in each case, but the parallel is not precise as Paul shows.
rwp@Romans:5:15 @{But not as the trespass} (\all' ouch hs\). It is more contrast than parallel: "the trespass" (\to paraptma\, the slip, fall to one side) over against the free gift (\to charisma\, of grace \charis\). {Much more} (\polli mallon\). Another _a fortiori_ argument. Why so? As a God of love he delights {much more} in showing mercy and pardon than in giving just punishment (Lightfoot). The gift surpasses the sin. It is not necessary to Paul's argument to make "the many" in each case correspond, one relates to Adam, the other to Christ.
rwp@Romans:5:18 @{Songs:then} (\ara oun\). Conclusion of the argument. Cf. strkjv@7:3,25; strkjv@8:12|, etc. Paul resumes the parallel between Adam and Christ begun in verse 12| and interrupted by explanation (13f.|) and contrast (15-17|). {Through one trespass} (\di' henos paraptmatos\). That of Adam. {Through one act of righteousness} (\di' henos dikaimatos\). That of Christ. The first "unto all men" (\eis pantas anthrpous\) as in verse 12|, the second as in verse 17| "they that receive, etc."
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}