NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp given:
rwp@
1Corinthians:1:12 @{Now this I mean} (\leg de touto\). Explanatory use of \leg\. Each has his party leader. \Apoll\ is genitive of \Apolls\ (Acts:18:24|), probably abbreviation of \Apollnius\ as seen in Codex Bezae for strkjv@Acts:18:24|. See on Acts for discussion of this "eloquent Alexandrian" (Ellicott), whose philosophical and oratorical preaching was in contrast "with the studied plainness" of Paul (1Corinthians:2:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:10|). People naturally have different tastes about styles of preaching and that is well, but Apollos refused to be a party to this strife and soon returned to Ephesus and refused to go back to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:12|). \Cph\ is the genitive of \Cphs\, the Aramaic name given Simon by Jesus (John:1:42|), \Petros\ in Greek. Except in strkjv@Galatians:2:7,8| Paul calls him Cephas. He had already taken his stand with Paul in the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:7-11; strkjv@Galatians:2:7-10|). Paul had to rebuke him at Antioch for his timidity because of the Judaizers (Galatians:2:11-14|), but, in spite of Baur's theory, there is no evidence of a schism in doctrine between Paul and Peter. If strkjv@2Peter:3:15f.| be accepted as genuine, as I do, there is proof of cordial relations between them and strkjv@1Corinthians:9:5| points in the same direction. But there is no evidence that Peter himself visited Corinth. Judaizers came and pitted Peter against Paul to the Corinthian Church on the basis of Paul's rebuke of Peter in Antioch. These Judaizers made bitter personal attacks on Paul in return for their defeat at the Jerusalem Conference. Songs:a third faction was formed by the use of Peter's name as the really orthodox wing of the church, the gospel of the circumcision. {And I of Christ} (\eg de Christou\). Still a fourth faction in recoil from the partisan use of Paul, Apollos, Cephas, with "a spiritually proud utterance" (Ellicott) that assumes a relation to Christ not true of the others. "Those who used this cry arrogated the common watchword as their _peculium_" (Findlay). This partisan use of the name of Christ may have been made in the name of unity against the other three factions, but it merely added another party to those existing. In scouting the names of the other leaders they lowered the name and rank of Christ to their level.
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:2:12 @{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:2:14 @{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: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:5:11 @{But now I write unto you} (\nun de egrapsa humin\). This is the epistolary aorist referring to this same epistle and not to a previous one as in verse 9|. As it is (when you read it) I did write unto you. {If any man that is named a brother be} (\ean tis adelphos onomazomenos i\). Condition of the third class, a supposable case. {Or a reviler or a drunkard} (\ loidoros methusos\). \Loidoros\ occurs in Euripides as an adjective and in later writings. In N.T. only here and strkjv@6:10|. For the verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:4:12|. \Methusos\ is an old Greek word for women and even men (cf. \paroinos\, of men, strkjv@1Timothy:3:3|). In N.T. only here and strkjv@6:10|. Cf. strkjv@Romans:13:13|. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 316) gives a list of virtues and vices on counters for Roman games that correspond remarkably with Paul's list of vices here and in strkjv@6:10|. Chrysostom noted that people in his day complained of the bad company given by Paul for revilers and drunkards as being men with more "respectable" vices! {With such a one, no, not to eat} (\ti toiouti mde sunesthiein\). Associative instrumental case of \toiouti\ after \sunesthiein\, "not even to eat with such a one." Social contacts with such "a brother" are forbidden
rwp@1Corinthians:6:18 @{Flee} (\pheugete\). Present imperative. Have the habit of fleeing without delay or parley. Note abruptness of the asyndeton with no connectives. Fornication violates Christ's rights in our bodies (verses 13-17|) and also ruins the body itself. {Without the body} (\ektos tou smatos\). Even gluttony and drunkenness and the use of dope are sins wrought on the body, not "within the body" (\entos tou smatos\) in the same sense as fornication. Perhaps the dominant idea of Paul is that fornication, as already shown, breaks the mystic bond between the body and Christ and hence the fornicator (\ho porneun\) {sins against his own body} (\eis to idion sma hamartanei\) in a sense not true of other dreadful sins. The fornicator takes his body which belongs to Christ and unites it with a harlot. In fornication the body is the instrument of sin and becomes the subject of the damage wrought. In another sense fornication brings on one's own body the two most terrible bodily diseases that are still incurable (gonorrhea and syphilis) that curse one's own body and transmit the curse to the third and fourth generation. Apart from the high view given here by Paul of the relation of the body to the Lord no possible father or mother has the right to lay the hand of such terrible diseases and disaster on their children and children's children. The moral and physical rottenness wrought by immorality defy one's imagination.
rwp@1Corinthians:7:29 @{But this I say} (\touto de phmi\. Note \phmi\ here rather than \leg\ (verses 8,12|). A new turn is here given to the argument about the present necessity. {The time is shortened} (\ho kairos sunestalmenos estin\). Perfect periphrastic passive indicative of \sustell\, old verb to place together, to draw together. Only twice in the N.T., here and strkjv@Acts:5:6| which see. Found in the papyri for curtailing expenses. Calvin takes it for the shortness of human life, but apparently Paul pictures the foreshortening of time (opportunity) because of the possible nearness of and hope for the second coming. But in Philippians Paul faces death as his fate (Phillipians:1:21-26|), though still looking for the coming of Christ (3:20|). {That henceforth} (\to loipon hina\). Proleptic position of \to loipon\ before \hina\ and in the accusative of general reference and \hina\ has the notion of result rather than purpose (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 997). {As though they had none} (\hs m echontes\). This use of \hs\ with the participle for an assumed condition is regular and \m\ in the _Koin_ is the normal negative of the participle. Songs:the idiom runs on through verse 31|.
rwp@1Corinthians:11:18 @{First of all} (\prton men\). There is no antithesis (\deuteron de\, secondly, or \epeita de\, in the next place) expressed. This is the primary reason for Paul's condemnation and the only one given. {When ye come together in the church} (\sunerchomenn hmn en ekklsii\). Genitive absolute. Here \ekklsia\ has the literal meaning of assembly. {Divisions} (\schismata\). Accusative of general reference with the infinitive \huparchein\ in indirect discourse. Old word for cleft, rent, from \schiz\. Example in papyri for splinter of wood. See on strkjv@1:10|. Not yet formal cleavages into two or more organizations, but partisan divisions that showed in the love-feasts and at the Lord's Supper. {Partly} (\meros ti\). Accusative of extent (to some part) like \panta\ in strkjv@10:33|. He could have said \ek merous\ as in strkjv@13:9|. The rumours of strife were so constant (I keep on hearing, \akou\).
rwp@1Corinthians:11:24 @{When he had given thanks} (\eucharistsas\). First aorist active participle of \euchariste\ from which word our word Eucharist comes, common late verb (see on ¯1:14|). {Which is for you} (\to huper humn\). \Klmenon\ (broken) of the Textus Receptus (King James Version) is clearly not genuine. Luke (Luke:22:19|) has \didomenon\ (given) which is the real idea here. As a matter of fact the body of Jesus was not broken (John:19:36|). The bread was broken, but not the body of Jesus. {In remembrance of me} (\eis tn emn anamnsin\). The objective use of the possessive pronoun \emn\. Not my remembrance of you, but your remembrance of me. \Anamnsis\, from \anamimnsk\, to remind or to recall, is an old word, but only here in N.T. save strkjv@Luke:22:19| which see.
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:15:5 @{And that he appeared to Cephas} (\kai hoti phth Kphi\). First aorist passive indicative of the defective verb \hora\, to see. Paul means not a mere "vision," but actual appearance. John uses \ephanerth\ (John:21:14|) from \phanero\, to make manifest, of Christ's appearance to the seven by the Sea of Galilee. Peter was listed first (\prtos\) among the Apostles (Matthew:10:2|). Jesus had sent a special message to him (Mark:16:7|) after his resurrection. This special appearance to Peter is made the determining factor in the joyful faith of the disciples (Luke:24:34|), though mentioned incidentally here. Paul had told all these four facts to the Corinthians in his preaching. He gives further proof of the fact of Christ's resurrection. There are ten appearances given besides the one to Paul. Nine are in the Gospels (Mary Magdalene in John and Mark, the other women in Matthew, the two going to Emmaus in Luke, Simon Peter in Luke and I Corinthians, the ten apostles and others in Luke and John and Mark, the eleven and others in John, the seven by the sea in John, to over five hundred in Galilee in Matthew and Paul and Mark, to the apostles in Jerusalem in Luke and Mark and Acts and I Corinthians) and one in I Corinthians above (to James). It will be seen that Paul mentions only five of the ten, one, that to James, not given elsewhere. What he gives is conclusive evidence of the fact, particularly when re-enforced by his own experience (the sixth appearance mentioned by Paul). The way to prove this great fact is to start with Paul's own witness given in this undoubted Epistle. The natural way to understand Paul's adverbs of time here is chronological: {then} (\eita\), {then} (\epeita\), {then} (\epeita\), {then} (\eita\), {last of all} (\eschaton pantn\). {To the twelve} (\tois ddeka\). The technical name. Only ten were present, for Judas was dead and Thomas was absent (John:20:24|).
rwp@1Corinthians:15:28 @{And when all things have been subjected} (\hotan de hupotagi ta panta\). Second aorist passive subjunctive of \hupotass\, not perfect. Merely, "when the all things are subjected unto him." The aorist subjunctive has given translators a deal of needless trouble in this passage. It is prophecy, of course. {That God may be all in all} (\hina i ho theos panta en pasin\). The final goal of all God's redemptive plans as Paul has so well said in strkjv@Romans:11:36|. Precisely this language Paul will use of Christ (Colossians:3:11|).
rwp@1John:2:12 @{I write} (\graph\). Present active indicative, repeated three times, referring to this Epistle. For "the name" see strkjv@3:23; strkjv@3John:1:7|. They were loyal to the name of Christ (Matthew:10:22|). {Are forgiven} (\aphentai\). Doric perfect passive indicative of \aphimi\ (seen also in strkjv@Luke:5:20,23|) for the usual \apheintai\. \Teknia\ (little children) probably includes all, as in verse 1|.
rwp@1John:2:16 @{All that} (\pn to\). Collective use of the neuter singular as in strkjv@5:4|, like \pn ho\ in strkjv@John:6:37,39|. Three examples, not necessarily covering all sins, are given in the nominative in apposition with \pn to\. "The lust of the flesh" (\h epithumia ts sarkos\, subjective genitive, lust felt by the flesh) may be illustrated by strkjv@Mark:4:19; strkjv@Galatians:5:17|. Songs:the genitive with \h epithumia tn ophthalmn\ (the lust of the eyes) is subjective, lust with the eyes as organs as shown by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:5:28|. The use of the "movies" today for gain by lustful exhibitions is a case in point. For \alazoneia\ see on ¯James:4:16|, the only other N.T. example. \Alazn\ (a boaster) occurs in strkjv@Romans:1:30; strkjv@2Timothy:3:2|. \Bios\ (life) as in strkjv@3:17| is the external aspect (Luke:8:14|), not the inward principle (\z\). David Smith thinks that, as in the case of Eve (Genesis:3:1-6|) and the temptations of Jesus (Matthew:4:1-11|), these three sins include all possible sins. But they are all "of the world" (\ek tou kosmou\) in origin, in no sense "of the Father" (\ek tou patros\). The problem for the believer is always how to be in the world and yet not of it (John:17:11,14ff.|).
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@1Thessalonians:1:6 @{Imitators of us and of the Lord} (\mimtai hmn kai tou kuriou\). \Mimts\ (\-ts\ expresses the agent) is from \mimeomai\, to imitate and that from \mimos\ (\mimic\, actor). Old word, more than "followers," in the N.T. only six times (1Thessalonians:1:6; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:16; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@Ephesians:5:1; strkjv@Hebrews:6:12|). Again Paul uses \ginomai\, to become, not \eimi\, to be. It is a daring thing to expect people to "imitate" the preacher, but Paul adds "and of the Lord," for he only expected or desired "imitation" as he himself imitated the Lord Jesus, as he expressly says in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:1|. The peril of it all is that people so easily and so readily imitate the preacher when he does not imitate the Lord. The fact of the "election" of the Thessalonians was shown by the character of the message given them and by this sincere acceptance of it (Lightfoot). {Having received the word} (\dexamenoi ton logon\). First aorist middle participle of \dechomai\, probably simultaneous action (receiving), not antecedent. {In much affliction} (\en thlipsei polli\). Late word, pressure. Tribulation (Latin _tribulum_) from \thlib\, to press hard on. Christianity has glorified this word. It occurs in some Christian papyrus letters in this same sense. Runs all through the N.T. (2Thessalonians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:5:3|). Paul had his share of them (Colossians:1:24; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:4|) and so he understands how to sympathize with the Thessalonians (1Thessalonians:3:3f.|). They suffered after Paul left Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:2:14|). {With joy of the Holy Spirit} (\meta charas pneumatos hagiou\). The Holy Spirit gives the joy in the midst of the tribulations as Paul learned (Romans:5:3|). "This paradox of experience" (Moffatt) shines along the pathway of martyrs and saints of Christ.
rwp@1Timothy:3:8 @{Deacons} (\diakonous\). Accusative case of general reference like the preceding with \dei einai\ understood. Technical sense of the word here as in strkjv@Phillipians:1:1| which see (two classes of church officers, bishops or elders, deacons). {Grave} (\semnous\). See strkjv@Phillipians:4:8|. Repeated in verse 11; strkjv@Titus:2:2|. {Not double-tongued} (\m dilogous\). Rare word (\dis, leg\) saying same thing twice. Xenophon has \diloge\ and \dilogia\. In Pollux, but LXX has \diglssos\ (double-tongued, Latin _bilinguis_). Only here in N.T. One placed between two persons and saying one thing to one, another to the other. Like Bunyan's Parson "Mr. Two-Tongues." {Not given to much wine} (\m oini polli prosechontas\). "Not holding the mind (\ton noun\ understood as usual with \prosech\, strkjv@1Timothy:1:4|) on much wine" (\oini\, dative case). That attitude leads to over-indulgence. {Not greedy of filthy lucre} (\m aischrokerdeis\). Old word from \aischros\ (Ephesians:5:12|) and \kerdos\ (Phillipians:1:21|). "Making small gains in mean ways" (Parry). Not genuine in verse 3|. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Titus:1:7| (of bishops).
rwp@1Timothy:3:9 @{The mystery of the faith} (\to mustrion ts pistes\). "The inner secret of the faith," the revelation given in Christ. See for \mustrion\ in Paul (2Thessalonians:2:7; strkjv@1Corinthians:2:7; strkjv@Romans:16:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:26; strkjv@Ephesians:3:9|). {In a pure conscience} (\en kathari suneidsei\). See strkjv@1:19|. "The casket in which the jewel is to be kept" (Lock).
rwp@1Timothy:5:17 @{The elders that rule well} (\hoi kals proesttes presbuteroi\). See verse 1| for ordinary sense of \presbuteros\ for "older man." But here of position in same sense as \episkopos\ (3:2|) as in strkjv@Titus:1:5| = \episkopos\ in verse 7|. Cf. Luke's use of \presbuteros\ (Acts:20:17|) = Paul's \episkopous\ (Acts:20:28|). \Proesttes\ is second perfect active participle of \proistmi\ (intransitive use) for which see strkjv@3:4|. {Let be counted worthy} (\axiousthsan\). Present passive imperative of \axio\, to deem worthy (2Thessalonians:1:11|). With genitive case here. {Of double honour} (\dipls tims\). Old and common contract adjective (\diploos\, two-fold, in opposition to \haploos\, single fold). But why "of double honour"? See strkjv@6:1| for "of all honour." White suggests "remuneration" rather than "honour" for \tims\ (a common use for price or pay). Liddon proposes "honorarium" (both honour and pay and so "double"). Wetstein gives numerous examples of soldiers receiving double pay for unusual services. Some suggest twice the pay given the enrolled widows. {Especially those who labour in word and teaching} (\malista hoi kopintes en logi kai didaskalii\). Either those who work hard or toil (usual meaning of \kopia\, strkjv@2Timothy:2:6|) in preaching and teaching (most probable meaning. See verse 18|) or those who teach and preach and not merely preside (a doubtful distinction in "elders" at this time). See strkjv@Titus:1:8f|. See both \kopia\ and \proistamai\ used for same men (elders) in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12| and the use of \kopia\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:10; strkjv@16:16|.
rwp@2John:1:10 @{If any one cometh and bringeth not} (\ei tis erchetai kai ou pherei\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and two present indicatives (\erchetai, pherei\). {This teaching} (\tautn tn didachn\). This teaching of Christ of verse 9|, which is the standard by which to test Gnostic deceivers (verse 7|). John does not refer to entertaining strangers (He strkjv@13:2; strkjv@1Timothy:5:10|), but to the deceiving propagandists who were carrying dissension and danger with them. {Receive him not} (\m lambanete auton\). Present active imperative with \m\. For \lamban\ in this sense see strkjv@John:1:12; strkjv@6:21; strkjv@13:20|. {Into your house} (\eis oikian\). Definite without the article like our at home, to town. {Give him no greeting} (\chairein auti m legete\). "Say not farewell to him." Apparently \chairein\ here (present active infinitive, object of \legete\ present active imperative with negative \m\) is used of farewell as in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11|, though usually in the N.T. (Acts:15:23; strkjv@23:26; strkjv@James:1:1|) of the salutation. But here the point turns on the stranger bringing into the house (or trying to do so) his heretical and harmful teaching which seems to be after the salutation is over. The usual greeting to a house is given in strkjv@Luke:10:5|. On the other hand, if \chairein\ means greeting, not farewell, here, it can very well be understood of the peril of allowing these Gnostic propagandists to spread their pernicious teachings (cf. Mormons or Bolshevists) in home and church (usually meeting in the home). This is assuming that the men were known and not mere strangers.
rwp@Info_2Peter @ CLAIMS PETRINE AUTHORSHIP Not only so, but in fuller form than strkjv@1Peter:1:1|, for the writer terms himself "Simon (Symeon in some MSS.) Peter," a fact that has been used against the genuineness. If no claim had been made, that would have been considered decisive against him. Simon (Symeon was the Jewish form as used by James in strkjv@Acts:15:14|) is the real name (John:1:42|) and Peter merely the Greek for Cephas, the nickname given by Christ. There is no reason why both could not properly be employed here. But the claim to Petrine authorship, if not genuine, leaves the Epistle pseudonymous. That was a custom among some Jewish writers and even Christian writers, as the spurious Petrine literature testifies (Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc.), works of a heretical or curious nature. Whatever the motive for such a pious fraud, the fact remains that II Peter, if not genuine, has to take its place with this pseudonymous literature and can hardly be deemed worthy of a place in the New Testament. And yet there is no heresy in this Epistle, no startling new ideas that would lead one to use the name of Simon Peter. It is the rather full of edifying and orthodox teaching.
rwp@Info_2Peter @ AND PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF PETER The writer makes use of his own contact with Jesus, especially at the Transfiguration of Christ (Mark:9:2-8; strkjv@Matthew:17:1-8; strkjv@Luke:9:28-36|). This fact has been used against the genuineness of the Epistle on the plea that the writer is too anxious, anyhow, to show that he is Symeon Peter (2Peter:1:1|). But Bigg rightly replies that, if he had only given his name with no personal contacts with Jesus, the name would be called "a forged addition." It is possible also that the experience on the Mount of Transfiguration may have been suggested by Peter's use of \exodos\ for his own death (2Peter:1:15|), the very word used by Luke (Luke:9:31|) as the topic of discussion between Jesus and Moses and Elijah. There is also in strkjv@2Peter:1:13| the use of "tent" (\sknoma\) for the life in the body, like Peter's use of "tents" (\sknas\) to Jesus at that very time (Mark:9:5; strkjv@Matthew:17:4; strkjv@Luke:9:33|). In strkjv@2Peter:1:14| Peter also refers to the plain words of Jesus about his coming death (John:21:18f.|). In strkjv@2Peter:1:15| Peter speaks of his own plan for preserving the knowledge of Jesus when he is gone (possibly by Mark's Gospel). All this is in perfect keeping with Peter's own nature.
rwp@Info_2Peter @ AND YET THE EPISTLE DIFFERS IN STYLE FROM FIRST PETER This is a fact, though one greatly exaggerated by some scholars. There are many points of similarity, for one thing, like the habit of repeating words (\epichorge\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:10,19, \bebaios\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:12,13,15|, \prophteia\ in strkjv@2Peter:1:20; strkjv@3:3|, etc.). These repetitions occur all through the Epistle as in I Peter. "This is a matter of very high importance" (Bigg). Again in both Epistles there is a certain dignity of style with a tendency to iambic rhythm. There is more quotation of the Old Testament in I Peter, but frequent allusion to words and phrases in II Peter. There are more allusions to words and facts in the Gospels in I Peter than in II Peter, though some do occur in II Peter. Besides those already given, note strkjv@2Peter:1:8| (Luke:13:7f.|), strkjv@2Peter:2:1| (Matthew:10:33|), strkjv@2Peter:2:20| (Matthew:12:45; strkjv@Luke:11:26|), strkjv@2Peter:3:4| (Matthew:24:1ff.|), and possibly strkjv@2Peter:1:3| to Christ's calling the apostles. Both appear to know and use the O.T. Apocrypha. Both are fond of the plural of abstract substantives. Both make sparing use of Greek particles. Both use the article similarly, idiomatically, and sometimes not using it. There are some 361 words in 1 Peter not in II Peter, 231 in II Peter not in I Peter. There are 686 \hapax legomena\ in N.T., 54 in II Peter instead of the average of 62, a large number when the brevity of the Epistle is considered. There are several ways of explaining these variations. One way is to say that they are written by different men, but difference of subject has to be borne in mind. All writers and artists have an early and a later manner. Another solution is that Peter employed different amanuenses. Silvanus was the one for I Peter (1Peter:5:12|). Mark was Peter's usual interpreter, but we do not know who was the amanuensis for II Peter, if indeed one was used. We know from strkjv@Acts:4:13| that Peter and John were considered unlettered men (\agrammatoi kai iditai\). II Peter and the Apocalypse illustrate this statement. II Peter may have more of Peter's real style than I Peter.
rwp@2Peter:1:9 @{He that lacketh these things} (\hi m parestin tauta\). "To whom (dative case of possession) these things are not (\m\ because a general or indefinite relative clause)." {Seeing only what is near} (\mupazn\). Present active participle of \mupaz\, a rare verb from \mups\ (in Aristotle for a near-sighted man) and that from \mue tous pas\ (to close the eyes in order to see, not to keep from seeing). The only other instance of \mupaz\ is given by Suicer from Ps. Dion. Eccl. Hier. ii. 3 (\mupasousi kai apostrephomeni\) used of a soul on which the light shines (blinking and turning away). Thus understood the word here limits \tuphlos\ as a short-sighted man screwing up his eyes because of the light. {Having forgotten} (\lthn labn\). "Having received forgetfulness." Second aorist active participle of \lamban\ and accusative \lthn\, old word, from \lthomai\, to forget, here only in N.T. See strkjv@2Timothy:1:5| for a like phrase \hupomnsin labn\ (having received remembrance). {The cleansing} (\tou katharismou\). See strkjv@Hebrews:1:3| for this word for the expiatory sacrifice of Christ for our sins as in strkjv@1Peter:1:18; strkjv@2:24; strkjv@3:18|. In strkjv@1Peter:3:21| Peter denied actual cleansing of sin by baptism (only symbolic). If there is a reference to baptism here, which is doubtful, it can only be in a symbolic sense. {Old} (\palai\). Of the language as in strkjv@Hebrews:1:1|.
rwp@2Peter:1:17 @{For he received} (\labn gar\). Second aorist active participle nominative singular of \lamban\, "he having received," but there is no finite verb, anacoluthon, changing in verse 19| (after parenthesis in 18|) to \echomen bebaioteron\ rather than \ebebaisen\. {When there came such a voice to him} (\phns enechtheiss auti toiasde\). Genitive absolute with first aorist passive participle feminine singular of \pher\ (cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:13|), repeated \enechtheisan\ in verse 18|. \Phn\ (voice) is used also of Pentecost (Acts:2:6|). \Toiosde\ (classical demonstrative) occurs here alone in the N.T. {From the excellent glory} (\hupo ts megaloprepous doxs\). "By the majestic glory." \Megalopreps\, old compound (\megas\, great, \prepei\, it is becoming), here only in N.T., several times in O.T., Apocr. (II Macc. strkjv@8:15), adverb in the inscriptions. Probably a reference to \nephel phtein\ (bright cloud, shekinah) in strkjv@Matthew:17:5|. The words given here from the "voice" agree exactly with strkjv@Matthew:17:5| except the order and the use of \eis hon\ rather than \en hi\. Mark (Mark:9:7|) and Luke (Luke:9:35|) have \akouete\. But Peter did not need any Gospel for his report here.
rwp@2Peter:2:22 @{It has happened} (\sumbebken\). Perfect active indicative of \sumbain\, for which see strkjv@1Peter:4:12|. {According to the true proverb} (\to ts althous paroimias\). "The word (\to\ used absolutely, the matter of, as in strkjv@Matthew:21:21; strkjv@James:4:14|) of the true proverb" (\paroimia\ a wayside saying, for which see strkjv@John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). The first proverb here given comes from strkjv@Proverbs:26:11|. \Exerama\ is a late and rare word (here only in N.T., in Diosc. and Eustath.) from \exera\, to vomit. {The sow that had washed} (\hs lousamen\). \Hs\, old word for hog, here only in N.T. Participle first aorist direct middle of \lou\ shows that it is feminine (anarthrous). This second proverb does not occur in the O.T., probably from a Gentile source because about the habit of hogs. Epictetus and other writers moralize on the habit of hogs, having once bathed in a filthy mud-hole, to delight in it. {To wallowing} (\eis kulismon\). "To rolling." Late and rare word (from \kuli\, strkjv@Mark:9:20|), here only in N.T. {In the mire} (\borborou\). Objective genitive, old word for dung, mire, here only in N.T. J. Rendel Harris (_Story of Ahikar_, p. LXVII) tells of a story about a hog that went to the bath with people of quality, but on coming out saw a stinking drain and went and rolled himself in it.
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@2Timothy:2:5 @{If also a man contend in the games} (\ean de kai athli tis\). Condition of third class with present (linear) active subjunctive of \athle\, old and common verb (from \athlos\, a contest), only this verse in N.T., but \sunathle\ in strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|. Note sharp distinction between \athli\ (present subjunctive, engage in a contest in general) and \athlsi\ (first aorist active subjunctive, engage in a particular contest). Not "except he have contended," but simply "unless he contend" (in any given case) "lawfully" (\nomims\). Old adverb, agreeably to the law, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:1:8|. {Is not crowned} (\ou stephanoutai\). Present passive indicative of \stephano\, old verb (from \stephanos\, crown), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:2:7,9|. One apodosis for two protases. The victor in the athletic contests was crowned with a garland.
rwp@Info_Acts @ LUKE THE AUTHOR It ought to be possible to assume this as a fact since the work of Ramsay and Harnack on various phases of the problems concerning the Acts. Harnack, in particular, has covered the ground with his accustomed thoroughness and care in his two volumes (_The Acts of the Apostles_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1909; _The Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1911). Ramsay's view may be found in Chapter I of _St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen_, Chapter XII of _Pauline and Other Studies_. A good summary of the matter appears in Part V of _The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_ by Dr. D. A. Hayes, in Robertson's _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, and in the introduction to the various commentaries by Knowling, Rackham, Furneaux, Rendall, Hackett, Meyer-Wendt, Zahn, Blass, Campbell-Morgan, Stokes. In Part I of _The Acts of the Apostles_, Vol. II of _The Beginnings of Christianity_, edited by Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake both sides are ably presented: _The Case for the Tradition_ by C. W. Emmet, _The Case against the Tradition_ by H. Windisch. _The Internal Evidence of Acts_ is discussed by the Editors, Foakes-Jackson and Lake, with an adverse conclusion against Luke. Henry J. Cadbury surveys _The Tradition_ (the external evidence) and draws a negative conclusion likewise on the ground that the early writers who ascribe Acts to Luke were not critical scholars. A similar position is taken by Cadbury in his more recent volume, _The Making of Luke--Acts_ (1927). But all the same the traditional view that Luke is the author of the Acts holds the field with those who are not prejudiced against it. The view of Baur that Acts is a _Tendenz_ writing for the purpose of healing the breach between Peter and Paul and showing that the two factions came together had great influence for a while. In fact both Ramsay and Harnack at first held it. Ramsay broke away first and he was followed by Harnack. Both were influenced to change their views by the accumulation of evidence to the effect that the author of both the Gospel and Acts is Luke the Physician and Friend of Paul. Part of this evidence has already been given in the Introduction to the Gospel according to Luke.
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:1:3 @{To whom also} (\hois kai\). He chose them and then also manifested himself to these very same men that they might have personal witness to give. {Shewed himself alive} (\parestsen heauton znta\). To the disciples the first Sunday evening (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:36-43; strkjv@John:20:19-25|), the second Sunday evening (John:20:26-29|), at the Sea of Tiberias (John:21:1-23|), on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6|), to the disciples in Jerusalem and Olivet (Luke:24:44-53; strkjv@Mark:16-19f.; strkjv@Acts:1:1-11|). Luke uses this verb \paristmi\ 13 times in the Acts both transitively and intransitively. It is rendered by various English words (present, furnish, provide, assist, commend). The early disciples including Paul never doubted the fact of the Resurrection, once they were convinced by personal experience. At first some doubted like Thomas (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:41; strkjv@John:20:24f.; strkjv@Matthew:28:17|). But after that they never wavered in their testimony to their own experience with the Risen Christ, "whereof we are witnesses" Peter said (Acts:3:15|). They doubted at first, that we may believe, but at last they risked life itself in defence of this firm faith. {After his passion} (\meta to pathein auton\). Neat Greek idiom, \meta\ with the articular infinitive (second aorist active of \pasch\) and the accusative of general reference, "after the suffering as to him." For \pathein\ used absolutely of Christ's suffering see also strkjv@Acts:17:3; strkjv@26:23|. {By many proofs} (\en pollois tekmriois\). Literally, "in many proofs." \Tekmrion\ is only here in the N.T., though an old and common word in ancient Greek and occurring in the _Koin_ (papyri, etc.). The verb \tekmair\, to prove by sure signs, is from \tekmar\, a sign. Luke does not hesitate to apply the definite word "proofs" to the evidence for the Resurrection of Christ after full investigation on the part of this scientific historian. Aristotle makes a distinction between \tekmrion\ (proof) and \smeion\ (sign) as does Galen the medical writer. {Appearing} (\optanomenos\). Present middle participle from late verb \optan\, late _Koin_ verb from root \opt\ seen in \opsomai, phthn\. In LXX, papyri of second century B.C. (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 83). Only here in the N.T. For \optasia\ for vision see strkjv@Acts:26:19; strkjv@Luke:1:22; strkjv@24:23|. {By the space of forty days} (\di' hmern tesserakonta\). At intervals (\dia\, between) during the forty days, ten appearances being known to us. Jesus was not with them continually now in bodily presence. The period of forty days is given here alone. The Ascension was thus ten days before Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came. Moses was in the mount forty days (Exodus:24:18|) and Jesus fasted forty days (Matthew:4:2|). In the Gospel of Luke 24 this separation of forty days between the Resurrection and the Ascension is not drawn. {The things concerning the Kingdom of God} (\ta peri ts basileias tou theou\). This phrase appears 33 times in Luke's Gospel, 15 times in Mark, 4 times in Matthew who elsewhere has "the kingdom of heaven," once in John, and 6 times in Acts. No essential distinction is to be drawn between the two for the Jews often used "heaven" rather than "God" to avoid using the Tetragrammaton. But it is noticeable how the word kingdom drops out of Acts. Other words like gospel (\euaggelion\) take the place of "kingdom." Jesus was fond of the word "kingdom" and Luke is fond of the idiom "the things concerning" (\ta peri\). Certainly with Jesus the term "kingdom" applies to the present and the future and covers so much that it is not strange that the disciples with their notions of a political Messianic kingdom (Acts:1:6|) were slow to comprehend the spiritual nature of the reign of God.
rwp@Acts:1:4 @{Being assembled together with them} (\sunalizomenos\). Present passive participle from \sunaliz\, an old verb in Herodotus, Xenophon, etc., from sun, with, and \haliz\, from \hals\, crowded. The margin of both the Authorized and the Revised Versions has "eating with them" as if from \sun\ and \hals\ (salt). Salt was the mark of hospitality. There is the verb \halisthte en auti\ used by Ignatius _Ad Magnes_. X, "Be ye salted in him." But it is more than doubtful if that is the idea here though the Vulgate does have _convescens illis_ "eating with them," as if that was the common habit of Jesus during the forty days (Wendt, Feine, etc.). Jesus did on occasion eat with the disciples (Luke:24:41-43; strkjv@Mark:16:14|). {To wait for the promise of the Father} (\perimenein tn epaggelian tou patros\). Note present active infinitive, to keep on waiting for (around, \peri\). In the Great Commission on the mountain in Galilee this item was not given (Matthew:28:16-20|). It is the subjective genitive, the promise given by the Father (note this Johannine use of the word), that is the Holy Spirit ("the promise of the Holy Spirit," objective genitive). {Which ye heard from me} (\hn kousate mou\). Change from indirect discourse (command), infinitives \chrizesthai\ and \perimenein\ after \parggeilen\ to direct discourse without any \eph\ (said he) as the English (Italics). Luke often does this (_oratior ariata_). Note also the ablative case of \mou\ (from me). Luke continues in verse 5| with the direct discourse giving the words of Jesus.
rwp@Acts:1:8 @{Power} (\dunamin\). Not the "power" about which they were concerned (political organization and equipments for empire on the order of Rome). Their very question was ample proof of their need of this new "power" (\dunamin\), to enable them (from \dunamai\, to be able), to grapple with the spread of the gospel in the world. {When the Holy Ghost is come upon you} (\epelthontos tou hagiou pneumatos eph' humas\). Genitive absolute and is simultaneous in time with the preceding verb "shall receive" (\lmpsesthe\). The Holy Spirit will give them the "power" as he comes upon them. This is the baptism of the Holy Spirit referred to in verse 5|. {My witnesses} (\mou martures\). Correct text. "Royal words of magnificent and Divine assurance" (Furneaux). Our word martyrs is this word \martures\. In strkjv@Luke:24:48| Jesus calls the disciples "witnesses to these things" (\martures toutn\, objective genitive). In strkjv@Acts:1:22| an apostle has to be a "witness to the Resurrection" of Christ and in strkjv@10:39| to the life and work of Jesus. Hence there could be no "apostles" in this sense after the first generation. But here the apostles are called "my witnesses." "His by a direct personal relationship" (Knowling). The expanding sphere of their witness when the Holy Spirit comes upon them is "unto the uttermost part of the earth" (\hes eschatou ts gs\). Once they had been commanded to avoid Samaria (Matthew:10:5|), but now it is included in the world program as already outlined on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:19; strkjv@Mark:16:15|). Jesus is on Olivet as he points to Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, the uttermost (last, \eschatou\) part of the earth. The program still beckons us on to world conquest for Christ. "The Acts themselves form the best commentary on these words, and the words themselves might be given as the best summary of the Acts" (Page). The events follow this outline (Jerusalem till the end of chapter 7, with the martyrdom of Stephen, the scattering of the saints through Judea and Samaria in chapter 8, the conversion of Saul, chapter 9, the spread of the gospel to Romans in Caesarea by Peter (chapter 10), to Greeks in Antioch (chapter 11), finally Paul's world tours and arrest and arrival in Rome (chapters 11 to 28).
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:8:22 @{Wickedness} (\kakias\). Only here in Luke's writings, though old word and in LXX (cf. strkjv@1Peter:2:1,16|). {If perhaps} (\ei ara\). _Si forte_. This idiom, though with the future indicative and so a condition of the first class (determined as fulfilled), yet minimizes the chance of forgiveness as in strkjv@Mark:11:13|. Peter may have thought that his sin was close to the unpardonable sin (Matthew:12:31|), but he does not close the door of hope. {The thought} (\h epinoia\). Old Greek word from \epinoe\, to think upon, and so purpose. Only here in the N.T.
rwp@Acts:11:26 @{Even for a whole year} (\kai eniauton holon\). Accusative of extent of time, probably the year A.D. 44, the year preceding the visit to Jerusalem (11:30|), the year of the famine. The preceding years with Tarsus as headquarters covered A.D. 37 (39) to 44. {They were gathered together with the church} (\sunachthnai en ti ekklsii\). First aorist passive infinitive of \sunag\, old verb, probably here to meet together as in strkjv@Matthew:28:12|. In strkjv@Acts:14:27| the verb is used of gathering together the church, but here \en ti ekklsii\ excludes that idea. Barnabas met together "in the church" (note first use of the word for the disciples at Antioch). This peculiar phrase accents the leadership and co-operation of Barnabas and Saul in teaching (\didaxai\, first aorist active infinitive) much people. Both infinitives are in the nominative case, the subject of \egeneto\ (it came to pass). {And that the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch} (\chrmatisai te prts en Antiocheii tous mathtas Christianous\). This first active infinitive \chrmatisai\ is also a subject of \egeneto\ and is added as a separate item by the use of \te\ rather than \kai\. For the word itself in the sense of divine command see on ¯Matthew:2:12,22; strkjv@Luke:2:26; strkjv@Acts:10:22|. Here and in strkjv@Romans:7:3| it means to be called or named (assuming a name from one's business, \chrma\, from \chraomai\, to use or to do business). Polybius uses it in this sense as here. \Tous mathtas\ (the disciples) is in the accusative of general reference with the infinitive. \Christianous\ (Christians) is simply predicate accusative. This word is made after the pattern of \Herodianus\ (Matthew:22:16|, \Heridianoi\, followers of Herod), \Caesarianus\, a follower of Caesar (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 377, gives papyri examples of the genitive \Kaisaros\ meaning also "belonging to Caesar" like the common adjective \Caesarianus\). It is made thus like a Latin adjective, though it is a Greek word, and it refers to the Hebrew belief in a Messiah (Page). The name was evidently given to the followers of Christ by the Gentiles to distinguish them from the Jews since they were Greeks, not Grecian Jews. The Jews would not call them Christians because of their own use of \Christos\ the Messiah. The Jews termed them Galileans or Nazarenes. The followers of Christ called themselves disciples (learners), believers, brethren, saints, those of the Way. The three uses of Christian in the N.T. are from the heathen standpoint (here), strkjv@Acts:26:28| (a term of contempt in the mouth of Agrippa), and strkjv@1Peter:4:16| (persecution from the Roman government). It is a clear distinction from both Jews and Gentiles and it is not strange that it came into use first here in Antioch when the large Greek church gave occasion for it. Later Ignatius was bishop in Antioch and was given to the lions in Rome, and John Chrysostom preached here his wonderful sermons.
rwp@Acts:13:9 @{But Saul, who is also called Paul} (\Saulos de, ho kai Paulos\). By this remarkably brief phrase Luke presents this epoch in the life of Saul Paul. The "also" (\kai\) does not mean that the name Paul was given now for the first time, rather than he had always had it. As a Jew and a Roman citizen, he undoubtedly had both names all the time (cf. John Mark, Symeon Niger, Barsabbas Justus). Jerome held that the name of Sergius Paulus was adopted by Saul because of his conversion at this time, but this is a wholly unlikely explanation, "an element of vulgarity impossible to St. Paul " (Farrar). Augustine thought that the meaning of the Latin _paulus_ (little) would incline Saul to adopt, "but as a proper name the word rather suggested the glories of the Aemilian family, and even to us recalls the name of another Paulus, who was 'lavish of his noble life'" (Page). Among the Jews the name Saul was naturally used up to this point, but from now on Luke employs Paul save when there is a reference to his previous life (Acts:22:7; strkjv@26:14|). His real career is work among the Gentiles and Paul is the name used by them. There is a striking similarity in sound between the Hebrew Saul and the Roman Paul. Paul was proud of his tribe of Benjamin and so of King Saul (Phillipians:3:5|). {Filled with the Holy Spirit} (\plstheis pneumatos hagiou\). First aorist (ingressive) passive participle of \pimplmi\ with the genitive case. A special influx of power to meet this emergency. Here was a cultured heathen, typical of the best in Roman life, who called forth all the powers of Paul plus the special help of the Holy Spirit to expose the wickedness of Elymas Barjesus. If one wonders why the Holy Spirit filled Paul for this emergency rather than Barnabas, when Barnabas was named first in strkjv@13:2|, he can recall the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit in his choice of agents (1Corinthians:12:4-11|) and also the special call of Paul by Christ (Acts:9:15; strkjv@26:17f.|). {Fastened his eyes} (\atenisas\). As already in strkjv@Luke:4:20; strkjv@22:56; strkjv@Acts:3:4,12; strkjv@6:15; strkjv@10:4|.
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:14:6 @{They became aware of it} (\sunidontes\). Second aorist (ingressive) active participle of \sunora\ (\suneidon\), old word to see together, to become conscious of as already in strkjv@12:12|. In the N.T. only by Luke and Paul. {Fled} (\katephugon\). Second aorist (effective) active indicative of \katapheug\, old verb, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:6:18|. Paul and Barnabas had no idea of remaining to be stoned (lynched) by this mob. It is a wise preacher who always knows when to stand his ground and when to leave for the glory of God. Paul and Barnabas were following the directions of the Lord Jesus given to the twelve on their special tour of Galilee (Matthew:10:23|). Lystra and Derbe, cities of Lycaonia (still part of the Province of Galatia, though in another _Regio_), not far from the base of the Black Mountain. Professor Sterrett has apparently identified Lystra by an inscription about six hours (18 miles) south-southwest from Iconium near the village Khatyn Serai and Derbe probably near the village Losta or Zosta though its location is really not known. Lystra had been made a colony in B.C. 6 and Derbe was the frontier city of the Roman empire in the southeast. These are the only cities mentioned, but they were of importance and show that Paul kept to his plan of going to centres of influence. The new imperial road from Antioch and Iconium reached these cities. {The region round about} (\tn perichron\) was "a high table land, ill-watered, bleak, but suited for sheep pasture" (Page).
rwp@Acts:14:27 @{Gathered the church together} (\sunagagontes tn ekklsian\). Second aorist active participle of \sunag\. It "was the first missionary meeting in history" (Furneaux). It was not hard to get the church together when the news spread that Paul and Barnabas had returned. "The suitability of the Gospel to become the religion of the world had not before been put to the test" (Furneaux). Doubtless many "wise-acres" had predicted failure as they did for William Carey and for Adoniram Judson and Luther Rice. {Rehearsed} (\anggellon\). Imperfect active. It was a long story for they had many things to tell of God's dealings "with them" (\met' autn\) for God had been "with them" all the while as Jesus had said he would be (Matthew:28:20|, \meth' hmn\). Paul could recount some of the details given later in strkjv@2Corinthians:11|. {And how} (\kai hoti\). Or "and that" in particular, as the upshot of it all. {He had opened a door of faith unto the Gentiles} (\noixen tois ethnesin thuran pistes\). Three times in Paul's Epistles (1Corinthians:16:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12; strkjv@Colossians:4:3|) he employed the metaphor of "door," perhaps a reminiscence of the very language of Paul here. This work in Galatia gained a large place in Paul's heart (Galatians:4:14f.|). The Gentiles now, it was plain, could enter the kingdom of God (verse 22|) through the door of faith, not by law or by circumcision or by heathen philosophy or mythology.
rwp@Acts:16:37 @{Unto them} (\pros autous\). The lictors by the jailor. The reply of Paul is a marvel of brevity and energy, almost every word has a separate indictment showing the utter illegality of the whole proceeding. {They have beaten us} (\deirantes hmas\). First aorist active participle of \der\, old verb to flay, to skin, to smite. The _Lex Valeria_ B.C. 509 and the _Lex Poscia_ B.C. 248 made it a crime to inflict blows on a Roman citizen. Cicero says, "To fetter a Roman citizen was a crime, to scourge him a scandal, to slay him--parricide." Claudius had "deprived the city of Rhodes of its freedom for having crucified some citizen of Rome" (Rackham). {Publicly} (\dmosii\). This added insult to injury. Common adverb (\hodi\) supplied with adjective, associative instrumental case, opposed to \idii\ or \kat' oikous\, strkjv@Acts:20:20|) {Uncondemned} (\akatakritous\). This same verbal adjective from \kata-krin\ with \a\ privative is used by Paul in strkjv@22:25| and nowhere else in the N.T. Rare in late Greek like \akatagnstos\, but in late _Koin_ (papyri, inscriptions). The meaning is clearly "without being tried." Paul and Silas were not given a chance to make a defence. They were sentenced unheard (25:16|). Even slaves in Roman law had a right to be heard. {Men that are Romans} (\anthrpous Romaious huparchontas\). The praetors did not know, of course, that Paul and Silas were Roman citizens any more than Lysias knew it in strkjv@Acts:22:27|. Paul's claim is not challenged in either instance. It was a capital offence to make a false claim to Roman citizenship. {Have cast us into prison} (\ebalan eis phulakn\). Second aorist active indicative of \ball\, old verb, with first aorist ending as often in the _Koin_ (\-an\, not \-on\). This was the climax, treating them as criminals. {And now privily} (\kai nun lathri\). Paul balances their recent conduct with the former. {Nay verily, but} (\ou gar, alla\). No indeed! It is the use of \gar\ so common in answers (\ge+ara\) as in strkjv@Matthew:27:23|. \Alla\ gives the sharp alternative. {Themselves} (\autoi\). As a public acknowledgment that they had wronged and mistreated Paul and Silas. Let them come themselves and lead us out (\exagagetsan\, third person plural second aorist active imperative of \exag\). It was a bitter pill to the proud praetors.
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:18:10 @{Because I am with thee} (\dioti eg eimi meta sou\). Jesus had given this promise to all believers (Matthew:28:20|) and here he renews it to Paul. This promise changes Paul's whole outlook. Jesus had spoken to Paul before, on the way to Damascus (9:4|), in Jerusalem (22:17f.|), in Troas (16:9|), in great crises of his life. He will hear him again (23:11; strkjv@27:23|). Paul knows the voice of Jesus. {No man shall set on thee to harm thee} (\oudeis epithsetai soi tou kaksai se\). Future direct middle indicative of \epitithmi\, old and common verb, here in direct middle to lay or throw oneself upon, to attack. Jesus kept that promise in Corinth for Paul. \Tou kaksai\ is genitive articular infinitive of purpose of \kako\, to do harm to. Paul would now face all the rabbis without fear. {I have much people} (\laos estin moi polus\). Dative of personal interest. "There is to me much people," not yet saved, but who will be if Paul holds on. There is the problem for every preacher and pastor, how to win the elect to Christ.
rwp@Acts:19:41 @{Dismissed the assembly} (\apelusen tn ekklsian\). The town-clerk thus gave a semblance of law and order to the mob by formally dismissing them, this much to protect them against the charge to which they were liable. This vivid, graphic picture given by Luke has all the earmarks of historical accuracy. Paul does not describe the incidents in his letters, was not in the theatre in fact, but Luke evidently obtained the details from one who was there. Aristarchus, we know, was with Luke in Caesarea and in Rome and could have supplied all the data necessary. Certainly both Gaius and Aristarchus were lively witnesses of these events since their own lives were involved.
rwp@Acts:20:2 @{Those parts} (\ta mer ekeina\). We have no way of knowing why Luke did not tell of Paul's stay in Troas (2Corinthians:2:12f.|) nor of meeting Titus in Macedonia (2Corinthians:2:13-7:16|) nor of Paul's visit to Illyricum (Romans:15:19f.|) to give time for II Corinthians to do its work (2Corinthians:13|), one of the most stirring experiences in Paul's whole career when he opened his heart to the Corinthians and won final victory in the church by the help of Titus who also helped him round up the great collection in Achaia. He wrote II Corinthians during this period after Titus arrived from Corinth. The unity of II Corinthians is here assumed. Paul probably met Luke again in Macedonia, but all this is passed by except by the general phrase: "had given them much exhortation" (\parakalesas autous logi polli\). Literally, "having exhorted them (the Macedonian brethren) with much talk" (instrumental case). {Into Greece} (\eis tn Hellada\). That is, Achaia (18:12; strkjv@19:21|), and particularly Corinth, whither he had at last come again after repeated attempts, pauses, and delays (2Corinthians:13:1|). Now at last the coast was clear and Paul apparently had an open door in Corinth during these three months, so completely had Titus at last done away with the opposition of the Judaizers there.
rwp@Acts:20:29 @{After my departing} (\meta tn aphixin mou\). Not his death, but his departure from them. From \aphikneomai\ and usually meant arrival, but departure in Herodotus IX. 17, 76 as here. {Grievous wolves} (\lukoi bareis\). \Bareis\ is heavy, rapacious, harsh. Jesus had already so described false teachers who would raven the fold (John:10:12|). Whether Paul had in mind the Judaizers who had given him so much trouble in Antioch, Jerusalem, Galatia, Corinth or the Gnostics the shadow of whose coming he already foresaw is not perfectly clear. But it will not be many years before Epaphras will come to Rome from Colossae with news of the new peril there (Epistle to the Colossians). In writing to Timothy (1Timothy:1:20|) Paul will warn him against some who have already made shipwreck of their faith. In strkjv@Revelation:2:2| John will represent Jesus as describing false apostles in Ephesus. {Not sparing the flock} (\m pheidomenoi tou poimniou\). Litotes again as so often in Acts. Sparing the flock was not the fashion of wolves. Jesus sent the seventy as lambs in the midst of wolves (Luke:10:3|). In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus had pictured the false prophets who would come as ravening wolves in sheep's clothing (Matthew:7:15|).
rwp@Acts:23:25 @{And he wrote} (\grapsas\). First aorist active participle of \graph\, agreeing with the subject (Lysias) of \eipen\ (said) back in verse 23| (beginning). {After this form} (\echousan ton tupon touton\). Textus Receptus has \periechousan\. The use of \tupon\ (type or form) like _exemplum_ in Latin (Page who quotes Cicero _Ad Att_. IX. 6. 3) may give merely the purport or substantial contents of the letter. But there is no reason for thinking that it is not a genuine copy since the letter may have been read in open court before Felix, and Luke was probably with Paul. The Roman law required that a subordinate officer like Lysias in reporting a case to his superior should send a written statement of the case and it was termed _elogium_. A copy of the letter may have been given Paul after his appeal to Caesar. It was probably written in Latin. The letter is a "dexterous mixture of truth and falsehood" (Furneaux) with the stamp of genuineness. It puts things in a favourable light for Lysias and makes no mention of his order to scourge Paul.
rwp@Acts:25:13 @{When certain days were passed} (\Hmern diagenomenon\). Genitive absolute of \diaginomai\, to come between, "days intervening." {Agrippa the King} (\Agrippas ho basileus\). Agrippa II son of Agrippa I of strkjv@Acts:12:20-23|. On the death of Herod King of Chalcis A.D. 48, Claudius A.D. 50 gave this Herod Agrippa II the throne of Chalcis so that Luke is correct in calling him king, though he is not king of Judea. But he was also given by Claudius the government of the temple and the right of appointing the high priest. Later he was given also the tetrarchies of Philip and Lysanias. He was the last Jewish king in Palestine, though not king of Judea. He angered the Jews by building his palace so as to overlook the temple and by frequent changes in the high priesthood. He made his capital at Caesarea Philippi which he called Neronias in honour of Nero. Titus visited it after the fall of Jerusalem. {Bernice} (\Bernik\). He was her brother and yet she lived with him in shameful intimacy in spite of her marriage to her uncle Herod King of Chalcis and to Polemon King of Cilicia whom she left. Schuerer calls her both a Jewish bigot and a wanton. She afterwards became the mistress of Titus. {Arrived at Caesarea} (\katntsan eis Kaisarian\). Came down (first aorist active of \katanta\) to Caesarea from Jerusalem. {And saluted Festus} (\aspasamenoi ton Phston\). The Textus Receptus has \aspasomenoi\ the future participle, but the correct text is the aorist middle participle \aspasamenoi\ which cannot possibly mean subsequent action as given in the Canterbury Revision "and saluted." It can only mean contemporaneous (simultaneous) action "saluting" or antecedent action like the margin "having saluted." But antecedent action is not possible here, so that simultaneous action is the only alternative. It is to be noted that the salutation synchronized with the arrival in Caesarea (note \kata\, down, the effective aorist tense), not with the departure from Jerusalem, nor with the whole journey. Rightly understood the aorist participle here gives no trouble at all (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 861-3).
rwp@Colossians:1:14 @{In whom} (\en hi\). In Christ as in strkjv@Ephesians:1:7|. This great sentence about Christ carries on by means of three relatives (\en hi\ 14|, \hos\ 15|, \hos\ 18|) and repeated personal pronoun (\autos\), twice with \hoti\ (15,19|), thrice with \kai\ (17,18,20|), twice alone (16,20|). {Our redemption} (\tn apolutrsin\). See on ¯Romans:3:24| for this great word (_Koin_), a release on payment of a ransom for slave or debtor (Hebrews:9:15|) as the inscriptions show (Deissmann, _Light, etc._, p. 327). {The forgiveness of our sins} (\tn aphesin tn hamartin\). Accusative case in apposition with \apolutrsin\ as in strkjv@Ephesians:1:7| ({remission}, sending away, \aphesis\, after the {redemption} \apolutrsis\, buying back). Only here we have \hamartin\ (sins, from \hamartan\, to miss) while in strkjv@Ephesians:1:7| we find \paraptmatn\ (slips, fallings aside, from \parapipt\).
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:2:13 @{And you} (\kai humas\). Emphatic position, object of the verb \sunezopoisen\ (did he quicken) and repeated (second \hums\). You Gentiles as he explains. {Being dead through your trespasses} (\nekrous ontas tois paraptmasin\). Moral death, of course, as in strkjv@Romans:6:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,5|. Correct text does not have \en\, but even so \paraptmasin\ (from \parapipt\, to fall beside or to lapse, strkjv@Hebrews:6:6|), a lapse or misstep as in strkjv@Matthew:6:14; strkjv@Romans:5:15-18; strkjv@Galatians:6:1|, can be still in the locative, though the instrumental makes good sense also. {And the uncircumcision of your flesh} (\kai ti akroboustii ts sarkos humn\). "Dead in your trespasses and your alienation from God, of which the uncircumcision of your flesh was a symbol" (Abbott). Clearly so, "the uncircumcision" used merely in a metaphorical sense. {Did he quicken together with him} (\sunezopoisen sun auti\). First aorist active indicative of the double compound verb \sunzopoie\, to make alive (\zos, poie\) with (\sun\, repeated also with \auti\, associative instrumental), found only here and in strkjv@Ephesians:2:5|, apparently coined by Paul for this passage. Probably \theos\ (God) is the subject because expressly so stated in strkjv@Ephesians:2:4f.| and because demanded by \sun auti\ here referring to Christ. This can be true even if Christ be the subject of \rken\ in verse 14|. {Having forgiven us} (\charisamenos hmin\). First aorist middle participle of \charizomai\, common verb from \charis\ (favour, grace). Dative of the person common as in strkjv@3:13|. The act of forgiving is simultaneous with the quickening, though logically antecedent.
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@Colossians:3:13 @{Forbearing one another} (\anechomenoi allln\). Present middle (direct) participle of \anech\ with the ablative case (\allln\), "holding yourselves back from one another." {Forgiving each other} (\charizomenoi heautois\). Present middle participle also of \charizomai\ with the dative case of the reflexive pronoun (\heautois\) instead of the reciprocal just before (\allln\). {If any man have} (\ean tis echi\). Third class condition (\ean\ and present active subjunctive of \ech\). {Complaint} (\momphn\). Old word from \memphomai\, to blame. Only here in N.T. Note \pros\ here with \tina\ in the sense of against for comparison with \pros\ in strkjv@2:31|. {Even as the Lord} (\kaths kai ho Kurios\). Some MSS. read \Christos\ for \Kurios\. But Christ's forgiveness of us is here made the reason for our forgiveness of others. See strkjv@Matthew:6:12,14f.| where our forgiveness of others is made by Jesus a prerequisite to our obtaining forgiveness from God.
rwp@Colossians:3:24 @{Ye shall receive} (\apolmpsesthe\). Future middle indicative of \apolamban\, old verb, to get back (\apo\), to recover. {The recompense} (\antapodosin\). "The full recompense," old word, in LXX, but only here in N.T., but \antapodoma\ twice (Luke:14:12; strkjv@Romans:11:9|). Given back (\apo\) in return (\anti\). {Ye serve the Lord Christ} (\to Kurii Christi douleuete\). As his slaves and gladly so. Perhaps better as imperatives, keep on serving.
rwp@ Based on parralel ref of strkjv@Mark:6:1-6, and the same Matthew:ref given
rwp@Info_Ephesians @ THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS FROM ROME A.D. 63 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There are some problems of a special nature that confront us about the so-called Epistle to the Ephesians. THE AUTHORSHIP It is not admitted by all that Paul wrote it, though no other adequate explanation of its origin has ever been given. Songs:far as subject matter and vocabulary and style are concerned, if Colossians is Pauline, there is little or nothing to be said against the Pauline authorship of this Epistle.
rwp@Info_Ephesians @ SPECIAL BOOKS ON EPHESIANS One may note Abbott (_Int. Crit. Comm_. 1897), Gross Alexander (1910), Beet (1891), Belser (1908), Candlish (1895), Dale (_Lectures on Ephesians_), Dibelius (_Handbuch_, 1912), Eadie (1883), Ellicott (1884), Ewald (_Zahn Komm._, 2 Auf. 1910), Findlay (1892), Gore (_Practical Exposition_, 1898), Haupt (_Meyer Komm._, 8 Auf. 1902), Hitchcock (1913), Hort (_Intr_. 1895), Knabenbauer (1913), Krukenberg (1903), Lidgett (1915), Lock (1929), Lueken (1906), Martin (_New Century Bible_), McPhail (1893), McPherson (1892), Meinertz (1917), Moule (1900), Mullins (1913), Murray (1915), Oltramare (1891), Robinson (1903), Salmond (1903), E. F. Scott (_Moffatt Comm._, 1930), Stroeter (_The Glory of the Body of Christ_, 1909), Von Soden (2 Aufl. 1893), F. B. Westcott (1906), Wohlenberg (1895). strkjv@Ephesians:1:1 @{Of Christ Jesus} (\Christou Isou\). Songs:B D, though Aleph A L have \Isou Christou\. Paul is named as the author and so he is. Otherwise the Epistle is pseudepigraphic. {By the will of God} (\dia thelmatos theou\). As in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:1; strkjv@Romans:1:1|. {At Ephesus} (\en Ephesi\). In Aleph and B these words are inserted by later hands, though both MSS. give the title \Pros Ephesious\. Origen explains the words \tois hagiois tois ousin\ as meaning "the saints that are" (genuine saints), showing that his MSS. did not have the words \en Ephesi\. The explanation of the insertion of these words has already been given in the remarks on "The Destination" as one copy of the general letter that was preserved in Ephesus. It is perfectly proper to call it the Epistle to the Ephesians if we understand the facts.
rwp@Ephesians:5:28 @{Even so ought} (\houts opheilousin\). As Christ loves the church (his body). And yet some people actually say that Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:7| gives a degrading view of marriage. How can one say that after reading strkjv@Ephesians:5:22-33| where the noblest picture of marriage ever drawn is given?
rwp@Ephesians:6:17 @{The helmet of salvation} (\tn perikephalaian tou striou\). Late word (\peri, kephal\, head, around the head), in Polybius, LXX, strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:8; strkjv@Ephesians:6:17| alone in N.T. {Which is the word of God} (\ho estin to rma tou theou\). Explanatory relative (\ho\) referring to the sword (\machairan\). The sword given by the Spirit to be wielded as offensive weapon (the others defensive) by the Christian is the word of God. See strkjv@Hebrews:4:12| where the word of God is called "sharper than any two-edged sword."
rwp@Ephesians:6:19 @{That utterance may be given unto me} (\hina moi dothi logos\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \didmi\, to give. See a like request in strkjv@Colossians:4:3|. Paul wishes their prayer for courage for himself.
rwp@Galatians:6:17 @{From henceforth} (\tou loipou\). Usually \to loipon\, the accusative of general reference, "as for the rest" (Phillipians:3:1; strkjv@4:8|). The genitive case (as here and strkjv@Ephesians:6:10|) means "in respect of the remaining time." {The marks of Jesus} (\ta stigmata tou Isou\). Old word from \stiz\, to prick, to stick, to sting. Slaves had the names or stamp of their owners on their bodies. It was sometimes done for soldiers also. There were devotees also who stamped upon their bodies the names of the gods whom they worshipped. Today in a round-up cattle are given the owner's mark. Paul gloried in being the slave of Jesus Christ. This is probably the image in Paul's mind since he bore in his body brandmarks of suffering for Christ received in many places (2Corinthians:6:4-6; strkjv@11:23ff.|), probably actual scars from the scourgings (thirty-nine lashes at a time). If for no other reason, listen to me by reason of these scars for Christ and "let no one keep on furnishing trouble to me."
rwp@Hebrews:6:11 @{And we desire} (\epithumoumen de\). Literary plural again like \pepeismetha\ (6:9|). He is not wholly satisfied with them as he had already shown (5:11-14|). They have not given up Christ (6:4-8|), but many of them are still babes (\npioi\, strkjv@5:13|) and not adults (\teleioi\, strkjv@5:14|) and others are in peril of becoming so. {Unto the fulness of hope} (\pros tn plrophorian ts elpidos\). For \plrophoria\ see strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:5; strkjv@Colossians:2:2|. {To the end} (\achri telous\). As in strkjv@3:6,14|.
rwp@Hebrews:7:13 @{Belongeth to another tribe} (\phuls heteras meteschken\). See strkjv@2:14| for \metech\, perfect active indicative here. A different (\heteras\) tribe. {Hath given attendance at} (\proseschken\). Perfect active indicative (watch perfects in Hebrews, not "for" aorists) of \prosech\, old verb, here with either \noun\ (mind) or self (\heauton\) understood with dative case (\ti thusiastrii\, the altar, for which word see strkjv@Matthew:5:23; strkjv@Luke:1:11|).
rwp@Hebrews:9:22 @{I may almost say} (\schedon\). Old adverb, only three times in the N.T., here, strkjv@Acts:13:44; strkjv@19:26|. Here it qualifies the entire clause, not just \panta\. {With blood} (\en haimati\). In blood. There were exceptions (Exodus:19:10; strkjv@32:30f.; strkjv@Leviticus:5:11f.; strkjv@15:5; strkjv@Numbers:16:46f.; strkjv@31:23f.|, etc.). {Apart from shedding of blood} (\chris haimatekchusias\). A double compound first found here (coined by the writer) and later in ecclesiastical writers (\haima\, blood, \ek\, out, \che\, to pour, like \ekchusis haimatos\ strkjv@1Kings:18:28|). "Pouring out of blood." The author seems to have in mind Christ's words in strkjv@Matthew:26:28|: "This is my blood of the covenant which is shed for many for the forgiveness of sins." The blood is the vital principle and is efficacious as an atonement. The blood of Christ sets aside all other plans for pardon.
rwp@Hebrews:10:37 @{A very little while} (\mikron hoson hoson\). From strkjv@Isaiah:26:20| as an introduction to the quotation from strkjv@Habbakkuk:2:3f|. {He that cometh} (\ho erchomenos\). The article \ho\ is added to \erchomenos\ in strkjv@Habbakkuk:2:3| and is given here a Messianic application.
rwp@Hebrews:11:3 @{By faith} (\pistei\). Instrumental case of \pistis\ which he now illustrates in a marvellous way. Each example as far as verse 31| is formally and with rhetorical skill introduced by \pistei\. After that only a summary is given. {We understand} (\nooumen\). Present active indicative of \noe\, old verb (from \nous\, intellect) as in strkjv@Matthew:15:17; strkjv@Romans:1:20|. The author appeals to our knowledge of the world in which these heroes lived as an illustration of faith. Recent books by great scientists like Eddington and Jeans confirm the position here taken that a Supreme Mind is behind and before the universe. Science can only stand still in God's presence and believe like a little child. {The worlds} (\tous ainas\). "The ages" as in strkjv@1:2| (cf. Einstein's fourth dimension, time). Accusative case of general reference. {Have been framed} (\katrtisthai\). Perfect passive infinitive of \katartiz\, to mend, to equip, to perfect (Luke:6:40|), in indirect discourse after \nooumen\. {Songs:that} (\eis to\). As a rule \eis to\ with the infinitive is final, but sometimes as here it expresses result as in strkjv@Romans:12:3| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1003). {Hath been made} (\gegonenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \ginomai\. {What is seen} (\to blepomenon\). Present passive articular participle (accusative case of general reference) of \blep\. {Of things which do appear} (\ek phainomenn\). Ablative case with \ek\ (out of) of the present passive participle. The author denies the eternity of matter, a common theory then and now, and places God before the visible universe as many modern scientists now gladly do.
rwp@Hebrews:12:1 @{Therefore} (\toigaroun\). Triple compound inferential participle (\toi, gar, oun\) like the German _doch denn nun_, a conclusion of emphasis, old particle, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:8|. There should be no chapter division here, since strkjv@12:1-3| really is the climax in the whole argument about the better promises (10:19-12:3|) with a passionate appeal for loyalty to Christ. {Us also} (\kai hmeis\). We as well as "these all" of strkjv@11:39| and all the more because of the "something better" given us in the actual coming of Christ. {Compassed about} (\echontes perikeimenon\). Literally, "having (\echontes\, present active participle of \ech\) lying around us" (\perikeimenon\, present middle participle of \perikeimai\, old verb as in strkjv@Luke:17:2|). {Cloud of witnesses} (\nephos marturn\). Old word (Latin _nubes_), here only in the N.T., for vast mass of clouds. \Nephel\ is a single cloud. The metaphor refers to the great amphitheatre with the arena for the runners and the tiers upon tiers of seats rising up like a cloud. The \martures\ here are not mere spectators (\theatai\), but testifiers (witnesses) who testify from their own experience (11:2,4,5,33,39|) to God's fulfilling his promises as shown in chapter strkjv@Hebrews:11|. {Laying aside} (\apothemenoi\). Second aorist-middle (indirect, from ourselves) participle of \apotithmi\, old verb as in strkjv@Colossians:3:8| (laying off old clothes). The runners ran in the stadium nearly naked. {Every weight} (\ogkon panta\). Old word (kin to \enegkein, pher\) like \phortos, baros\. Here every encumbrance that handicaps like doubt, pride, sloth, anything. No trailing garment to hinder or trip one. {The sin which doth so easily beset us} (\tn euperistaton hamartian\). "The easily besetting sin." There are a dozen possible renderings of this double compound verbal from \eu\, well, and \periistmi\, to place around or to stand around (intransitive). The Vulgate has _circumstans nos peccatum_ (the sin standing around us). Probably this is the true idea here, "the easily encompassing (or surrounding) sin." In this case apostasy from Christ was that sin. In our cases it may be some other sin. The verbal adjective reminds one of the ring of wild beasts in the jungle that encircle the camp-fire at night each ready to pounce upon a careless victim. {Let us run} (\trechmen\). Present active volitive subjunctive of \trech\, "let us keep on running." {With patience} (\di' hupomons\). Not with impatience, doubt, or despair. {The race that is set before us} (\ton prokeimenon hmin agna\). Note the article and the present middle participle of \prokeimai\, old compound (already in strkjv@6:18|, and also in strkjv@12:2|). Dative case (\hmin\) of personal interest.
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@James:1:5 @{Lacketh wisdom} (\leipetai sophias\). Condition of first class, assumed as true, \ei\ and present passive indicative of \leip\ to be destitute of, with ablative case \sophias\. "If any one falls short of wisdom." A banking figure, to have a shortage of wisdom (not just knowledge, \gnses\, but wisdom \sophias\, the practical use of knowledge). {Let him ask} (\aiteit\). Present active imperative of \aite\, "let him keep on asking." {Of God} (\para tou theou\). "From (from beside) God," ablative case with \para\. Liberally (\hapls\). This old adverb occurs here only in the N.T. (from \haplous\, single-fold, strkjv@Matthew:6:22|, and \haplots\, simplicity, generosity, is common-- strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Romans:12:8|). But the adverb is common in the papyri by way of emphasis as simply or at all (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). Mayor argues for the sense of "unconditionally" (the logical moral sense) while Hort and Ropes agree and suggest "graciously." The other sense of "abundantly" or "liberally" suits the idea in \haplots\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Romans:12:8|, but no example of the adverb in this sense has been found unless this is one here. See strkjv@Isaiah:55:1| for the idea of God's gracious giving and the case of Solomon (1Kings:3:9-12; strkjv@Proverbs:2:3|). {Upbraideth not} (\m oneidizontos\). Present active participle of \oneidiz\ (old verb to reproach, to cast in one's teeth, strkjv@Matthew:5:11|) in the ablative case like \didontos\ agreeing with \theou\ and with the usual negative of the participle (\me\). This is the negative statement of \didontos hapls\ (giving graciously). The evil habit of giving stinging words along with the money is illustrated in Sirach strkjv@41:22 and Plutarch (_Deuteronomy:adulat._, p. 64A). ] Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:4:16|. {And it shall be given him} (\kai dothsetai auti\). First future passive of \didmi\, a blessed promise in accord with the words of Jesus (Matthew:7:7,11; strkjv@Luke:11:13|), meaning here not only "wisdom," but all good gifts, including the Holy Spirit. There are frequent reminiscences of the words of Jesus in this Epistle.
rwp@James:2:6 @{But ye have dishonoured the poor man} (\humeis de timasate ton ptchon\). First aorist active indicative of \atimaz\, old verb from \atimos\, dishonoured (Matthew:13:57|). In the act of partiality pictured in strkjv@2:3|. {Oppress you} (\katadunasteuousin humn\). Not very common compound (\katadunasteu\, present active indicative, from \kata\ and \dunasts\, potentate, strkjv@Luke:1:52|), used of the devil in strkjv@Acts:10:38| (only other N.T. example). Examples in papyri of harsh treatment by men in authority. Already poor Christians are feeling pressure from rich Jews as overlords. {Drag you} (\helkousin humas\). Old and vigorous word for violent treatment, as of Paul in strkjv@Acts:16:19; strkjv@21:30|. Cf. such violence in strkjv@Luke:12:58; strkjv@Acts:8:3|. {Before the judgment-seats} (\eis kritria\). "To courts of justice" as in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:2,4| (only other N.T. examples). Common in the papyri in this sense. From \krin\ to judge, \krits\ (judge), place where judgment is given.
rwp@James:2:8 @{Howbeit} (\mentoi\). Probably not adversative here, but simply confirmatory, "if now," "if indeed," "if really." Common in Xenophon in this sense. See the contrast (\de\) in verse 9|. {If ye fulfil} (\ei teleite\). Condition of first class, assumed as true with \ei\ and present active indicative of \tele\, old verb, to bring to completion, occurring in strkjv@Romans:2:27| also with \nomos\ (law). Jesus used \plro\ in strkjv@Matthew:4:17|. James has \tre\ in strkjv@2:10|. {The royal law} (\nomon basilikon\). Old adjective for royal, regal (from \basileus\ king), as of an officer (John:4:46|). But why applied to \nomos\? The Romans had a phrase, _lex regia_, which came from the king when they had kings. The absence of the article is common with \nomos\ (4:11|). It can mean a law fit to guide a king, or such as a king would choose, or even the king of laws. Jesus had said that on the law of love hang all the law and the prophets (Matthew:22:40|), and he had given the Golden Rule as the substance of the Law and the prophets (Matthew:7:12|). This is probably the royal law which is violated by partiality (James:2:3|). It is in accord with the Scripture quoted here (Leviticus:19:18|) and ratified by Jesus (Luke:10:28|).
rwp@James:5:15 @{The prayer of faith} (\h euch ts pistes\). Cf. strkjv@1:6| for prayer marked by faith. {Shall save} (\ssei\). Future active of \sz\, to make well. As in strkjv@Matthew:9:21f.; strkjv@Mark:6:56|. No reference here to salvation of the soul. The medicine does not heal the sick, but it helps nature (God) do it. The doctor cooperates with God in nature. {The sick} (\ton kamnonta\). Present active articular participle of \kamn\, old verb, to grow weary (Hebrews:12:3|), to be sick (here), only N.T. examples. {The Lord shall raise him up} (\egerei auton ho kurios\). Future active of \egeir\. Precious promise, but not for a professional "faith-healer" who scoffs at medicine and makes merchandise out of prayer. {And if he have committed sins} (\kan hamartias i pepoiks\). Periphrastic perfect active subjunctive (unusual idiom) with \kai ean\ (crasis \kan\) in condition of third class. Supposing that he has committed sins as many sick people have (Mark:2:5ff.; strkjv@John:5:14; strkjv@9:2f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:30|). {It shall be forgiven him} (\aphethsetai auti\). Future passive of \aphimi\ (impersonal passive as in strkjv@Matthew:7:2,7; strkjv@Romans:10:10|). Not in any magical way, not because his sickness has been healed, not without change of heart and turning to God through Christ. Much is assumed here that is not expressed.
rwp@Info_John @ THE FOURTH GOSPEL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION GREATEST OF BOOKS The test of time has given the palm to the Fourth Gospel over all the books of the world. If Luke's Gospel is the most beautiful, John's Gospel is supreme in its height and depth and reach of thought. The picture of Christ here given is the one that has captured the mind and heart of mankind. It is not possible for a believer in Jesus Christ as the Son of God to be indifferent to modern critical views concerning the authorship and historical value of this Holy of Holies of the New Testament. Here we find _The Heart of Christ_ (E. H. Sears), especially in chapters strkjv@John:14-17|. If Jesus did not do or say these things, it is small consolation to be told that the book at least has symbolic and artistic value for the believer. The language of the Fourth Gospel has the clarity of a spring, but we are not able to sound the bottom of the depths. Lucidity and profundity challenge and charm us as we linger over it.
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@John:1:9 @{There was} (\n\). Imperfect indicative. Emphatic position at the beginning of the sentence and so probably not periphrastic conjugation with \erchomenon\ (coming) near the end, though that is possible. {The true light} (\to phs to althinon\). "The light the genuine," not a false light of wreckers of ships, but the dependable light that guides to the harbor of safety. This true light had been on hand all the time in the darkness (\n\ imperfect, linear action) before John came. {Even the light} (not in the Greek). Added in the English to make plain this interpretation. {Lighteth every man} (\phtizei panta anthrpon\). Old verb (from \phs\) to give light as in strkjv@Revelation:22:5; strkjv@Luke:11:35f|. The Quakers appeal to this phrase for their belief that to every man there is given an inner light that is a sufficient guide, the Quaker's text it is called. But it may only mean that all the real light that men receive comes from Christ, not necessarily that each one receives a special revelation. {Coming} (\erchomenon\). This present middle participle of \erchomai\ can be taken with \anthrpon\ just before (accusative masculine singular), "every man as he comes into the world." It can also be construed with \phs\ (nominative neuter singular). This idea occurs in strkjv@John:3:19; strkjv@11:27; strkjv@12:46|. In the two last passages the phrase is used of the Messiah which makes it probable here. But even so the light presented in strkjv@11:27; strkjv@12:46| is that of the Incarnate Messiah, not the Pre-incarnate Logos. Here \kosmos\ rather than \panta\ occurs in the sense of the orderly universe as often in this Gospel. See strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|.
rwp@John:1:45 @{Philip findeth} (\heuriskei Philippos\). Dramatic present again. Philip carries on the work. One wins one. If that glorious beginning had only kept on! Now it takes a hundred to win one. {Nathaniel} (\ton Nathanal\). It is a Hebrew name meaning "God has given" like the Greek \Theodore\ (Gift of God). He was from Cana of Galilee (John:21:2|), not far from Bethsaida and so known to Philip. His name does not occur in the Synoptics while Bartholomew (a patronymic, _Bar Tholmai_) does not appear in John. They are almost certainly two names of the same man. Philip uses \heurkamen\ (verse 41|) also to Nathanael and so unites himself with the circle of believers, but instead of \Messian\ describes him "of whom (\hon\ accusative with \egrapsen\) Moses in the law (Deuteronomy:18:15|) and the prophets (so the whole O.T. as in strkjv@Luke:24:27,44|) did write." {Jesus of Nazareth the son of Joseph} (\Isoun huion tou Isph ton apo Nazaret\). More exactly, "Jesus, son of Joseph, the one from Nazareth." Jesus passed as son (no article in the Greek) of Joseph, though John has just described him as "God-only Begotten" in verse 18|, but certainly Philip could not know this. Bernard terms this part "the irony of St. John" for he is sure that his readers will agree with him as to the real deity of Jesus Christ. These details were probably meant to interest Nathanael.
rwp@John:3:34 @{The words of God} (\ta rmata tou theou\). God sent his Son (3:17|) and he speaks God's words. {By measure} (\ek metrou\). That is God has put no limit to the Spirit's relation to the Son. God has given the Holy Spirit in his fulness to Christ and to no one else in that sense.
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:4:1 @{When therefore} (\Hs oun\). Reference to strkjv@3:22f|. the work of the Baptist and the jealousy of his disciples. \Oun\ is very common in John's Gospel in such transitions. {The Lord} (\ho Kurios\). Songs:the best manuscripts (Neutral Alexandrian), though the Western class has \ho Isous\. Mark usually has \ho Isous\ and Luke often \ho Kurios\. In the narrative portion of John we have usually \ho Isous\, but \ho Kurios\ in five passages (4:1; strkjv@6:23; strkjv@11:2; strkjv@20:20; strkjv@21:12|). There is no reason why John should not apply \ho Kurios\ to Jesus in the narrative sections as well as Luke. Bernard argues that these are "explanatory glosses," not in the first draft of the Gospel. But why? When John wrote his Gospel he certainly held Jesus to be \Kurios\ (Lord) as Luke did earlier when he wrote both Gospel and Acts This is hypercriticism. {Knew} (\egn\). Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\. The Pharisees knew this obvious fact. It was easy for Jesus to know the attitude of the Pharisees about it (2:24|). Already the Pharisees are suspicious of Jesus. {How that} (\hoti\). Declarative \hoti\ (indirect assertion). {Was making and baptizing more disciples than John} (\pleionas mathtas poiei kai baptizei Ians\). Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John's early ministry (Mark:1:5; strkjv@Matthew:3:5; strkjv@Luke:3:7,15|) in order to see the significance of this statement that Jesus had forged ahead of him in popular favour. Already the Pharisees had turned violently against John who had called them broods of vipers. It is most likely that they drew John out about the marriage of Herod Antipas and got him involved directly with the tetrarch so as to have him cast into prison (Luke:3:19f.|). Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. v. 2) gives a public reason for this act of Herod Antipas, the fear that John would "raise a rebellion," probably the public reason for his private vengeance as given by Luke. Apparently John was cast into prison, though recently still free (John:3:24|), before Jesus left for Galilee. The Pharisees, with John out of the way, turn to Jesus with envy and hate.
rwp@John:4:42 @{Not because of thy speaking} (\ouketi dia tn sn lalian\). "No longer because of thy talk," good and effective as that was. \Lalia\ (cf. \lale\) is talk, talkativeness, mode of speech, one's vernacular, used by Jesus of his own speech (John:8:43|). {We have heard} (\akkoamen\). Perfect active indicative of \akou\, their abiding experience. {For ourselves} (\autoi\). Just "ourselves." {The Saviour of the world} (\ho str tou kosmou\). See strkjv@Matthew:1:21| for ssei used of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term \str\ to Jesus again in strkjv@1John:4:14|. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (verse 22|). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (verse 26|) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: "At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah." But why "merely"? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their "Saviour," Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on strkjv@John:4:42|: "That in the first century Messiah was given the title str is not proven." The use of "saviour and god" for Ptolemy in the third century B.C. is well known. "The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East" (Deissmann, _Light_, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke:2:11; strkjv@John:4:42; strkjv@Acts:5:31; strkjv@3:23; strkjv@Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23; strkjv@Titus:1:4; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@3:6; strkjv@2Timothy:1:10; strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11; strkjv@2:20; strkjv@3:2,18|). All these are writings of the first century A.D. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world.
rwp@John:5:18 @{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:5:22 @{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:5:38 @{And} (\kai\). "And yet" as in strkjv@1:10| and strkjv@5:40| below. {His word abiding in you} (\ton logon autou en humin menonta\). But God's word had come to them through the centuries by the prophets. For the phrase see strkjv@10:35; strkjv@15:3; strkjv@17:6; strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@2:14|. {Him ye believe not} (\touti humeis ou pisteuete\). "This one" (\touti\, dative case with \pisteuete\) in emphatic relation to preceding "he" (\ekeinos\, God). Jesus has given them God's word, but they reject both Jesus and God's word (John:14:9|).
rwp@John:5:39 @{Ye search} (\eraunte\). Proper spelling as the papyri show rather than \ereunte\, the old form (from \ereuna\, search) as in strkjv@7:52|. The form here can be either present active indicative second person plural or the present active imperative second person plural. Only the context can decide. Either makes sense here, but the reason given "because ye think" (\hoti humeis dokeite\, clearly indicative), supports the indicative rather than the imperative. Besides, Jesus is arguing on the basis of their use of "the Scriptures" (\tas graphas\). The plural with the article refers to the well-known collection in the Old Testament (Matthew:21:42; strkjv@Luke:24:27|). Elsewhere in John the singular refers to a particular passage (2:22; strkjv@7:38; strkjv@10:35|). {In them ye have eternal life} (\en autais zn ainion echein\). Indirect assertion after \dokeite\ without "ye" expressed either as nominative (\humeis\) or accusative (\humas\). Bernard holds that in John \doke\ always indicates a mistaken opinion (5:45; strkjv@11:13,31; strkjv@13:29; strkjv@16:20; strkjv@20:15|). Certainly the rabbis did make a mechanical use of the letter of Scripture as a means of salvation. {These are they} (\ekeinai eisin hai\). The true value of the Scriptures is in their witness to Christ (of me, \peri emou\). Luke (24:27,45|) gives this same claim of Jesus, and yet some critics fail to find the Messiah in the Old Testament. But Jesus did.
rwp@John:6:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). A common, but indefinite, note of time in John (3:22; strkjv@5:1; strkjv@6:1; strkjv@7:1|). The phrase does not mean immediate sequence of events. As a matter of fact, a whole year may intervene between the events of chapter 5 in Jerusalem and those in chapter 6 in Galilee. There is no sufficient reason for believing that chapter 6 originally preceded chapter 5. The feeding of the five thousand is the only event before the last visit to Jerusalem recorded in all Four Gospels (Mark:6:30-44; strkjv@Matthew:14:13-21; strkjv@Luke:9:10-17; strkjv@John:6:1-13|). The disciples have returned from the tour of Galilee and report to Jesus. It was the passover time (John:6:4|) just a year before the end. {To the other side of the Sea of Galilee} (\peran ts thalasss ts Galilaias\). The name given in Mark and Matthew. It is called Gennesaret in strkjv@Luke:5:1| and "Sea of Tiberias" in strkjv@John:21:1|. Here "of Tiberias" (\ts Tiberiados\) is added as further description. Herod Antipas A.D. 22 built Tiberias to the west of the Sea of Galilee and made it his capital. See verse 23| for this city. Luke (Luke:9:10|) explains that it was the eastern Bethsaida (Julias) to which Jesus took the disciples, not the western Bethsaida of strkjv@Mark:6:45| in Galilee.
rwp@John:6:2 @{Followed} (\kolouthei\). Descriptive imperfect active, picturing the crowd, but without the details of the boat for Christ and the rapid race of the crowd on foot (Mark:6:32f.; strkjv@Matthew:14:13f.|). {They beheld} (\etheroun\). Imperfect active of \there\. They had been beholding the signs which Jesus had been doing (\epoiei\, imperfect again) for a long time (2:23|), most of which John has not given (Mark:1:29f.; strkjv@2:1; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@6:5|). The people were eager to hear Jesus again (Luke:9:11|) and to get the benefit of his healing power "on them that were sick" (\epi tn asthenountn\, the weak or feeble, without strength, \a\ privative and \sthenos\, strength).
rwp@John:6:11 @{The loaves} (\tous artous\). Those of verse 9|. {Having given thanks} (\eucharistsas\). The usual grace before meals (Deuteronomy:8:10|). The Synoptics use "blessed" \eulogsen\ (Mark:6:41; strkjv@Matthew:14:19; strkjv@Luke:9:16|). {He distributed} (\diedken\). First aorist active indicative of \diadidmi\, old verb to give to several (\dia\, between). {To them that were set down} (\tois anakeimenois\). Present middle participle (dative case) of \anakeimai\, old verb to recline like \anapesein\ in verse 10|. {As much as they would} (\hoson thelon\). Imperfect active of \thel\, "as much as they wished."
rwp@John:6:24 @{When the multitude therefore saw} (\hote oun eiden ho ochlos\). Resumption and clarification of the complicated statements of verse 22|. {That Jesus was not there} (\hoti Isous ouk estin ekei\). Present indicative retained in indirect discourse. They still did not understand how Jesus had crossed over, but they acted on the basis of the plain fact. {They themselves got into} (\enebsan autoi eis\). Second aorist active indicative of \embain\ followed by \eis\ (both \en\ and \eis\ together as often in N.T.). {Seeking Jesus} (\ztountes ton Isoun\). Present active participle of \zte\. They had a double motive apart from the curiosity explained in verse 22|. They had clearly not given up the impulse of the evening before to make Jesus king (6:15|) and they had hopes of still another bountiful repast at the hands of Jesus as he said (6:26|).
rwp@John:6:37 @{All that} (\pn ho\). Collective use of the neuter singular, classic idiom, seen also in strkjv@6:39; strkjv@17:2,24; strkjv@1John:5:4|. Perhaps the notion of unity like \hen\ in strkjv@17:21| underlies this use of \pn ho\. {Giveth me} (\didsin moi\). For the idea that the disciples are given to the Son see also strkjv@6:39,65; strkjv@10:29; strkjv@17:2,6,9,12,24; strkjv@18:9|. {I will in no wise cast out} (\ou m ekbal ex\). Strong double negation as in verse 35| with second aorist active subjunctive of \ball\. Definite promise of Jesus to welcome the one who comes.
rwp@John:6:64 @{That believe not} (\hoi ou pisteuousin\). Failure to believe kills the life in the words of Jesus. {Knew from the beginning} (\idei ex archs\). In the N.T. we have \ex archs\ only here and strkjv@16:4|, but \ap' archs\ in apparently the same sense as here in strkjv@15:27; strkjv@1John:2:7,24; strkjv@3:11| and see strkjv@Luke:1:2; strkjv@1John:1:1|. From the first Jesus distinguished between real trust in him and mere lip service (2:24; strkjv@8:31|), two senses of \pisteu\. {Were} (\eisin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse. {And who it was that should betray him} (\kai tis estin ho paradsn\). Same use of \estin\ and note article and future active participle of \paradidmi\, to hand over, to betray. John does not say here that Jesus knew that Judas would betray him when he chose him as one of the twelve, least of all that he chose him for that purpose. What he does say is that Jesus was not taken by surprise and soon saw signs of treason in Judas. The same verb is used of John's arrest in strkjv@Matthew:4:12|. Once Judas is termed traitor (\prodots\) in strkjv@Luke:6:16|. Judas had gifts and was given his opportunity. He did not have to betray Jesus.
rwp@John:6:65 @{Except it be given him of the Father} (\ean m i dedomenon auti ek tou patros\). Condition of third class with \ean m\ and periphrastic perfect passive subjunctive of \didmi\. Precisely the same point as in verse 44| where we have \helkusi\ instead of \i dedomenon\. The impulse to faith comes from God. Jesus does not expect all to believe and seems to imply that Judas did not truly believe.
rwp@John:6:69 @{We have believed} (\hmeis pepisteukamen\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu\, "We have come to believe and still believe" (verse 29|). {And know} (\kai egnkamen\). Same tense of \ginsk\, "We have come to know and still know." {Thou art the Holy One of God} (\su ei ho hagios tou theou\). Bernard follows those who believe that this is John's report of the same confession given by the Synoptics (Mark:8:27f.; strkjv@Matthew:16:13-20; strkjv@Luke:9:18f.|), an utterly unjustifiable conclusion. The details are wholly different. Here in the synagogue in Capernaum, there on Mt. Hermon near Caesarea Philippi. What earthly difficulty is there in supposing that Peter could make a noble confession twice? That is to my mind a wooden conception of the apostles in their growing apprehension of Christ.
rwp@John:7:22 @{For this cause} (\dia touto\). Some would take this phrase with the preceding verb \thaumazete\ (ye marvel for this cause). {Hath given} (\dedken\). Present active indicative of \didmi\ (permanent state). {Not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers} (\ouch hoti ek tou Muses estin all' ek tn patern\). A parenthesis to explain that circumcision is older in origin than Moses. {And on the sabbath ye circumcise} (\kai en sabbati peritemnete\). Adversative use of \kai\=and yet as in 19|. That is to say, the Jews keep one law (circumcision) by violating another (on the Sabbath, the charge against him in chapter 5, healing on the Sabbath).
rwp@John:8:20 @{In the treasury} (\en ti gazophulakii\). See already strkjv@Mark:12:41; strkjv@Luke:21:1| for this word for the treasure-chambers of the temple. "It abutted on the Court of the Women, and against its walls were placed chests, trumpet-like in form, as receptacles for the offerings of the worshippers" (Bernard). The Persian word _gaza_ (treasure) occurs only once in the N.T. (Acts:8:27|) and the compound (\phulak\, guard) only here in John. Jesus hardly taught within a treasure-chamber. It probably means "at the treasury in the temple." This court was probably the most public part of the temple (Vincent). {And} (\kai\)="and yet" as in strkjv@1:10|, etc. {Because his hour was not yet come} (\hoti oup elluthei h hra autou\). {Reason} (\hoti\) given why no one seized (\epiasen\, cf. strkjv@7:30|) him. \Elluthei\ is past perfect active of \erchomai\, "had not yet come." This very use of \hra\ appears in strkjv@2:4| and the very clause in strkjv@7:30| which see.
rwp@John:9:22 @{Because they feared the Jews} (\hoti ephobounto tous Ioudaious\). Imperfect middle, a continuing fear and not without reason. See already the whispers about Jesus because of fear of the Jews (7:13|). {Had agreed already} (\d sunetetheinto\). Past perfect middle of \suntithmi\, to put together, to form a compact (7:32,47-49|). {If any man should confess him to be Christ} (\ean tis auton homologsi Christon\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \homologe\ and predicate accusative \Christon\. Jesus had made confession of himself before men the test of discipleship and denial the disproof (Matthew:10:32; strkjv@Luke:12:8|). We know that many of the rulers nominally believed on Jesus (12:42|) and yet "did not confess him because of the Pharisees" (\alla dia tous Pharisaious ouch hmologoun\), for the very reason given here, "that they might not be put out of the synagogue" (\hina m aposunaggoi genntai\). Small wonder then that here the parents cowered a bit. {That he should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina aposunaggos gentai\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. \Aposunaggos\ (\apo\ and \sunagg\) is found in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:42; strkjv@16:2|. A purely Jewish word naturally. There were three kinds of excommunication (for thirty days, for thirty more, indefinitely).
rwp@John:9:24 @{A second time} (\ek deuterou\). He had given the Pharisees the facts the first time (9:15|). It was really the third time (see \palin\ in strkjv@9:17|). Now it was like a joke unless the Pharisees meant to imply that his previous story was untrue. {Give glory to God} (\dos doxan ti thei\). Second aorist active imperative of \didmi\ (cf. \sches, hes\). This phrase does not mean gratitude to God as in strkjv@Luke:17:18|. It is rather an adjuration to speak the truth (Joshua:7:19; strkjv@1Samuel:6:5|) as if he had not done it before. Augustine says: "_Quid est Daniel:gloriam Deo? Nega quod accepisti._" Is a sinner (\hamartlos estin\). They can no longer deny the fact of the cure since the testimony of the parents (9:19|) and now wish the man to admit that he was lying in saying that Jesus healed him. He must accept their ecclesiastical authority as proving that Jesus had nothing to do with the cure since Jesus is a sinner. They wish to decide the fact by logic and authority like all persecutors through the ages. Recall the Pharisaic distinction between \dikaios\ (righteous) and \hamartlos\ (sinner).
rwp@John:10:13 @{Because he is a hireling} (\hoti misthtos estin\). And only that, without the shepherd heart that loves the sheep. Reason given for the conduct of the hireling after the parenthesis about the wolf. {And careth not for the sheep} (\kai ou melei auti peri tn probatn\). Literally, "and it is no care to him about the sheep." This use of the impersonal \melei\ (present active indicative) is quite common, as in strkjv@Matthew:22:16|. But God does care (1Peter:5:7|).
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:10:29 @{Which} (\hos\). Who. If \ho\ (which) is correct, we have to take \ho patr\ as nominative absolute or independent, "As for my Father." {Is greater than all} (\pantn meizn estin\). If we read \hos\. But Aleph B L W read \ho\ and A B Theta have \meizon\. The neuter seems to be correct (Westcott and Hort). But is it? If so, the meaning is: "As for my Father, that which he hath given me is greater than all." But the context calls for \hos... meizn\ with \ho patr\ as the subject of \estin\. The greatness of the Father, not of the flock, is the ground of the safety of the flock. Hence the conclusion that "no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand."
rwp@John:11:56 @{They sought therefore for Jesus} (\eztoun oun ton Isoun\). Imperfect active of \zte\ and common \oun\ of which John is so fond. They were seeking Jesus six months before at the feast of tabernacles (7:11|), but now they really mean to kill him. {As they stood in the temple} (\en ti hieri hestkotes\). Perfect active participle (intransitive) of \histmi\, a graphic picture of the various groups of leaders in Jerusalem and from other lands, "the knots of people in the Temple precincts" (Bernard). They had done this at the tabernacles (7:11-13|), but now there is new excitement due to the recent raising of Lazarus and to the public order for the arrest of Jesus. {That he will not come to the feast?} (\hoti ou m elthi eis tn heortn;\). The form of the question (indirect discourse after \dokeite\) assumes strongly that Jesus will not (\ou m\, double negative with second aorist active \elthi\ from \erchomai\) dare to come this time for the reason given in verse 57|.
rwp@John:11:57 @{The chief priests and the Pharisees} (\hoi archiereis kai hoi Pharisaioi\). The Sanhedrin. {Had given commandment} (\dedkeisan entolas\). Past perfect active of \didmi\. {That he should shew it} (\hina mnusi\). Sub-final \hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \mnu\, old verb to disclose, to report formally (Acts:23:30|). {If any man knew} (\ean tis gni\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \ginsk\. {Where he was} (\pou estin\). Indirect question with interrogative adverb and present indicative \estin\ retained like \gni\ and \mnusi\ after the secondary tense \dedkeisan\. {That they might take him} (\hops piassin auton\). Purpose clause with \hops\ instead of \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \piaz\ so often used before (7:44|, etc.).
rwp@John:12:2 @{Songs:they made him a supper there} (\epoisan oun auti deipnon ekei\). Here again \oun\ is not inferential, but merely transitional. This supper is given by Mark (Mark:14:3-9|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6-13|) just two days (Mark:14:1|) before the passover, that is on our Tuesday evening (beginning of Jewish Wednesday), while John mentions (12:2-9|) it immediately after the arrival of Jesus in Bethany (12:1|). One must decide which date to follow. Mark and Matthew and Luke follow it with the visit of Judas to the Sanhedrin with an offer to betray Jesus as if exasperated by the rebuke by Jesus at the feast. Bernard considers that John "is here more probably accurate." It all turns on John's purpose in putting it here. This is the last mention of Jesus in Bethany and he may have mentioned it proleptically for that reason as seems to me quite reasonable. Westcott notes that in chapter 12 John closes his record of the public ministry of the Lord relative to the disciples at this feast (1-11|), to the multitude in the triumphal entry (12-19|), to the world outside in the visit of the Greeks (20-36a|), and with two summary judgements (36b-50|). There is no further reason to refer to the feast in the house of another Simon when a sinful woman anointed Jesus (Luke:7:36-50|). It is no credit to Luke or to John with Mark and Matthew to have them all making a jumble like that. There were two anointings by two absolutely different women for wholly different purposes. See the discussion on Luke for further details. {And Martha served} (\kai h Martha dikonei\). Imperfect active of \diakone\, picturing Martha true to the account of her in strkjv@Luke:10:40| (\polln diakonian\, \diakonein\ as here). But this fact does not show that Martha was the wife of this Simon at all. They were friends and neighbours and Martha was following her bent. It is Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6|) who mention the name of the host. It is not Simon the Pharisee (Luke:7:36|), but Simon the leper (Mark:14:3; strkjv@Matthew:26:6|) in whose house they meet. The name is common enough. The Simon in Luke was sharply critical of Jesus; this one is full of gratitude for what Jesus has done for him. {That sat at meat} (\tn anakeimenn\). "That lay back," reclined as they did, articular participle (ablative case after \ek\) of the common verb \anakeimai\. Perhaps Simon gave the feast partly in honour of Lazarus as well as of Jesus since all were now talking of both (John:12:9|). It was a gracious occasion. The guests were Jesus, the twelve apostles, and Martha, Mary, and Lazarus.
rwp@John:12:4 @{Judas Iscariot} (\Ioudas ho Iskarits\). See \ho Iskarits\ in strkjv@14:22|. See strkjv@6:71; strkjv@13:1| for like description of Judas save that in strkjv@6:71| the father's name is given in the genitive, \Simnos\ and \Iskaritou\ (agreeing with the father), but in strkjv@13:1| \Iskarits\ agrees with \Ioudas\, not with \Simnos\. Clearly then both father and son were called "Iscariot" or man of Kerioth in the tribe of Judah (Joshua:15:25|). Judas is the only one of the twelve not a Galilean. {One of his disciples} (\heis tn mathtn autou\). Likewise in strkjv@6:71|, only there \ek\ is used after \heis\ as some MSS. have here. This is the shameful fact that clung to the name of Judas. {Which should betray him} (\ho melln auton paradidonai\). John does not say in strkjv@6:71| (\emellen paradidonai auton\) or here that Judas "was predestined to betray Jesus" as Bernard suggests. He had his own responsibility for his guilt as Jesus said (Matthew:26:24|). \Mell\ here simply points to the act as future, not as necessary. Note the contrast between Mary and Judas. "Mary in her devotion unconsciously provides for the honour of the dead. Judas in his selfishness unconsciously brings about the death itself" (Westcott).
rwp@John:12:5 @{Sold} (\eprath\). First aorist passive indicative of \piprask\, old verb to sell (Matthew:13:46|). {For three hundred pence} (\triakosin dnarin\). Genitive of price. Same item in strkjv@Mark:14:5|, while in strkjv@Matthew:26:9| it is simply "for much" (\pollou\). But all three have "given to the poor" (\edoth ptchois\). First aorist passive indicative of \didmi\ with dative case \ptchois\ (note absence of the article, poor people), real beggars, mendicants (Matthew:19:21; strkjv@Luke:14:13|). But only John singles out Judas as the one who made the protest against this waste of money while Mark says that "some" had indignation and Matthew has it that "the disciples" had indignation. Clearly Judas was the spokesman for the group who chimed in and agreed with his protest. The amount here spent by Mary (ten guineas) would equal a day labourer's wages for a year (Dods).
rwp@John:12:49 @{He hath given} (\dedken\). Perfect active indicative. Christ has permanent commission. {What I should say and what I should speak} (\ti eip kai ti lals\). Indirect question retaining the deliberative subjunctive (second aorist active \eip\, first aorist active \lals\). Meyer and Westcott take \eip\ to refer to the content and \lals\ more to the varying manner of delivery. Possibly so.
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:13:15 @{An example} (\hupodeigma\). For the old \paradeigma\ (not in N.T.), from \hupodeiknumi\, to show under the eyes as an illustration or warning (Matthew:3:7|), common in the papyri for illustration, example, warning, here only in John, but in strkjv@James:5:10; strkjv@2Peter:2:6; strkjv@Hebrews:4:11; strkjv@8:5; strkjv@9:26|. Peter uses \tupoi\ (1Peter:5:3|) with this incident in mind. In strkjv@Jude:1:7| \deigma\ (without \hupo\) occurs in the sense of example. {That ye also should do} (\hina kai humeis poite\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \poie\ (keep on doing). Doing what? Does Jesus here institute a new church ordinance as some good people today hold? If so, it is curious that there is no record of it in the N.T. Jesus has given the disciples an object lesson in humility to rebuke their jealousy, pride, and strife exhibited at this very meal. The lesson of the "example" applies to all the relations of believers with each other. It is one that is continually needed.
rwp@John:14:2 @{Mansions} (\monai\). Old word from \men\, to abide, abiding places, in N.T. only here and verse 23|. There are many resting-places in the Father's house (\oikia\). Christ's picture of heaven here is the most precious one that we possess. It is our heavenly home with the Father and with Jesus. {If it were not so} (\ei de m\). Ellipsis of the verb (Mark:2:21; strkjv@Revelation:2:5,16; strkjv@John:14:11|). Here a suppressed condition of the second class (determined as unfulfilled) as the conclusion shows. {I would have told you} (\eipon an humin\). Regular construction for this apodosis (\an\ and aorist--second active--indicative). {For I go} (\hoti poreuomai\). Reason for the consolation given, futuristic present middle indicative, and explanation of his words in strkjv@13:33| that puzzled Peter so (13:36f.|). {To prepare a place for you} (\hetoimasai topon humin\). First aorist active infinitive of purpose of \hetoimaz\, to make ready, old verb from \hetoimos\. Here only in John, but in strkjv@Mark:10:40| (Matthew:20:23|). It was customary to send one forward for such a purpose (Numbers:10:33|). Songs:Jesus had sent Peter and John to make ready (this very verb) for the passover meal (Mark:14:12; strkjv@Matthew:26:17|). Jesus is thus our Forerunner (\prodromos\) in heaven (Hebrews:6:20|).
rwp@John:17:4 @{I glorified thee on the earth} (\eg se edoxasa epi ts gs\). Verse 3| is parenthetical and so verse 4| goes on after verse 2|. He had prayed for further glorification. {Having accomplished} (\teleisas\). First aorist active participle of \teleio\, old verb from \teleios\ (perfect). Used in strkjv@4:34| by Jesus with \to ergon\ as here. That was Christ's "food" (\brma\) and joy. Now as he faces death he has no sense of failure as some modern critics say, but rather fulness of attainment as in strkjv@19:30| (\tetelestai\). Christ does not die as a disappointed man, but as the successful messenger, apostle (\apesteils\, verse 3|) of the Father to men. {Thou hast given} (\dedkas\). Perfect active indicative of \didmi\, regarded as a permanent task.
rwp@John:18:11 @{Into the sheath} (\eis tn thkn\). Old word from \tithmi\, to put for box or sheath, only here in N.T. In strkjv@Matthew:26:52| Christ's warning is given. {The cup} (\to potrion\). Metaphor for Christ's death, used already in reply to request of James and John (Mark:10:39; strkjv@Matthew:20:22|) and in the agony in Gethsemane before Judas came (Mark:14:36; strkjv@Matthew:26:39; strkjv@Luke:22:42|), which is not given by John. The case of \to potrion\ is the suspended nominative for note \auto\ (it) referring to it. {Shall I not drink?} (\ou m pi;\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \pin\ with the double negative \ou m\ in a question expecting the affirmative answer. Abbott takes it as an exclamation and compares strkjv@6:37; strkjv@Mark:14:25|.
rwp@John:18:12 @{The chief captain} (\ho chiliarchos\). They actually had the Roman commander of the cohort along (cf. strkjv@Acts:21:31|), not mentioned before. {Seized} (\sunelabon\). Second aorist active of \sullamban\, old verb to grasp together, to arrest (technical word) in the Synoptics in this context (Mark:14:48; strkjv@Matthew:26:55|), here alone in John. {Bound} (\edsan\). First aorist active indicative of \de\, to bind. As a matter of course, with the hands behind his back, but with no warrant in law and with no charge against him. {To Annas first} (\pros Annan prton\). Ex-high priest and father-in-law (\pentheros\, old word, only here in N.T.) of Caiaphas the actual high priest. Then Jesus was subjected to a preliminary and superfluous inquiry by Annas (given only by John) while the Sanhedrin were gathering before Caiaphas. Bernard curiously thinks that the night trial actually took place here before Annas and only the early morning ratification was before Caiaphas. Songs:he calmly says that "Matthew inserts the name _Caiaphas_ at this point (the night trial) in which he seems to have been mistaken." But why "mistaken"? {That year} (\tou eniautou ekeinou\). Genitive of time.
rwp@John:19:11 @{Thou wouldest have} (\ouk eiches\). Imperfect active indicative without \an\, but apodosis of second-class condition as in strkjv@15:22,24|. {Except it were given thee} (\ei m n dedomenon\). Periphrastic past perfect indicative of \didmi\ (a permanent possession). {From above} (\anthen\). From God (cf. strkjv@3:3|), the same doctrine of government stated by Paul in strkjv@Romans:13:1f|. Pilate did not get his "authority" from the Sanhedrin, but from Caesar. Jesus makes God the source of all real "authority." {Hath greater sin} (\meizona hamartian echei\). The same idiom in strkjv@9:41|. Caiaphas has his authority from God also and has used Pilate for his own base end.
rwp@John:19:13 @{Sat down on the judgement seat} (\ekathisen epi bmatos\). "Took his seat upon the \bma\" (the raised platform for the judge outside the palace as in strkjv@Acts:7:5|). The examination is over and Pilate is now ready for the final stage. {The Pavement} (\Lithostrton\). Late compound from \lithos\, stone, and the verbal adjective \strtos\ form \strnnumi\, to speak, a mosaic or tesselated pavement, spread with stones, in strkjv@2Chronicles:7:3|, Josephus, Epictetus, papyri. The Chaldean name \Gabbath\, an elevation, was apparently given because of the shape.
rwp@John:20:21 @{Even so send I you} (\kag pemp humas\). Jesus has often spoken of the Father's sending him using both \apostell\ and \pemp\. Here he employs both words in practically the same sense. Jesus still bears the Commission of the Father (perfect active indicative). For this balanced contention (as... so) see strkjv@6:57; strkjv@10:15|. This is the first of the three commissions given by the Risen Christ (another on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6|), another on the Mount of Olives (Luke:24:44-51; strkjv@Acts:1:3-11|).
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@Jude:1:7 @{Even as} (\hs\). Just "as." The third instance (Jude:passes by the deluge) in Jude, the cities of the plain. {The cities about them} (\hai peri autas poleis\). These were also included, Admah and Zeboiim (Deuteronomy:29:23; strkjv@Hosea:11:8|). Zoar, the other city, was spared. {In like manner} (\ton homoion tropon\). Adverbial accusative (cf. \hs\). Like the fallen angels. {Having given themselves over to fornication} (\ekporneusasai\). First aorist active participle feminine plural of \ekporneu\, late and rare compound (perfective use of \ek\, outside the moral law), only here in N.T., but in LXX (Genesis:38:24; strkjv@Exodus:34:15f.|, etc.). Cf. \aselgeian\ in verse 4|. {Strange flesh} (\sarkos heteras\). Horrible licentiousness, not simply with women not their wives or in other nations, but even unnatural uses (Romans:1:27|) for which the very word "sodomy" is used (Genesis:19:4-11|). The pronoun \heteras\ (other, strange) is not in strkjv@2Peter:2:10|. {Are set forth} (\prokeintai\). Present middle indicative of \prokeimai\, old verb, to lie before, as in strkjv@Hebrews:12:1f|. {As an example} (\deigma\). Predicate nominative of \deigma\, old word (from \deiknumi\ to show), here only in N.T., sample, specimen. strkjv@2Peter:2:6| has \hupodeigma\ (pattern). {Suffering} (\hupechousai\). Present active participle of \hupech\, old compound, to hold under, often with \dikn\ (right, justice, sentence strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|) to suffer sentence (punishment), here only in N.T. {Of eternal fire} (\puros ainiou\). Like \desmois aidiois\ in verse 7|. Cf. the hell of fire (Matthew:5:22|) and also strkjv@Matthew:25:46|. Jude:has no mention of Lot.
rwp@Jude:1:14 @{And to these also} (\de kai toutois\). Dative case, for these false teachers as well as for his contemporaries. {Enoch the seventh from Adam} (\hebdomos apo Adam Hench\). The genealogical order occurs in strkjv@Genesis:5:4-20|, with Enoch as seventh. He is so termed in Enoch strkjv@60:8; strkjv@93:3. {Prophesied} (\eprophteusen\). First aorist active indicative of \prophteu\. If the word is given its ordinary meaning as in strkjv@1Peter:1:10|, then Jude:terms the Book of Enoch an inspired book. The words quoted are "a combination of passages from Enoch" (Bigg), chiefly from Enoch strkjv@1:9. {With ten thousand of his holy ones} (\en hagiais muriasin autou\). "With (\en\ of accompaniment, strkjv@Luke:14:31|) his holy ten thousands" (\murias\ regular word, feminine gender, for ten thousand, strkjv@Acts:19:19|, there an unlimited number like our myriads, strkjv@Luke:12:1|).
rwp@Luke:2:1 @{Decree from Caesar Augustus} (\dogma para Kaisaros Augoustou\). Old and common word from \doke\, to think, form an opinion. No such decree was given by Greek or Roman historians and it was for long assumed by many scholars that Luke was in error. But papyri and inscriptions have confirmed Luke on every point in these crucial verses strkjv@2:1-7|. See W.M. Ramsay's books (_Was Christ Born at Bethelehem?_ _Luke the Physician_. _The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the N.T._). {The World} (\tn oikoumenn\). Literally, {the inhabited} ({land}, \gn\). Inhabited by the Greeks, then by the Romans, then the whole world (Roman world, the world ruled by Rome). Songs:Acts:11:28; strkjv@17:6|. {Should be enrolled} (\apographesthai\). It was a census, not a taxing, though taxing generally followed and was based on the census. This word is very old and common. It means to write or copy off for the public records, to register.
rwp@Luke:3:18 @{Many other exhortations} (\polla men oun kai hetera\). Literally, many and different things did John \evangelize\, \euaggelizeto\, to the people. Luke has given a bare sample of the wonderful messages of the Baptist. Few as his words preserved are they give a definite and powerful conception of his preaching.
rwp@Luke:3:22 @{Descended} (\katabnai\). Same construction as the preceding infinitive. {The Holy Ghost} (\to pneuma to hagion\). The Holy Spirit. strkjv@Mark:1:10| has merely the Spirit (\to pneuma\) while strkjv@Matthew:3:16| has the Spirit of God (\pneuma theou\). {In a bodily form} (\smatiki eidei\). Alone in Luke who has also "as a dove" (\hs peristeran\) like Matthew and Mark. This probably means that the Baptist saw the vision that looked like a dove. Nothing is gained by denying the fact or possibility of the vision that looked like a dove. God manifests his power as he will. The symbolism of the dove for the Holy Spirit is intelligible. We are not to understand that this was the beginning of the Incarnation of Christ as the Cerinthian Gnostics held. But this fresh influx of the Holy Spirit may have deepened the Messianic consciousness of Jesus and certainly revealed him to the Baptist as God's Son. {And a voice came out of heaven} (\kai phnn ex ouranou genesthai\). Same construction of infinitive with accusative of general reference. The voice of the Father to the Son is given here as in strkjv@Mark:1:11|, which see, and strkjv@Matthew:3:17| for discussion of the variation there. The Trinity here manifest themselves at the baptism of Jesus which constitutes the formal entrance of Jesus upon his Messianic ministry. He enters upon it with the Father's blessing and approval and with the power of the Holy Spirit upon him. The deity of Christ here appears in plain form in the Synoptic Gospels. The consciousness of Christ is as clear on this point here as in the Gospel of John where the Baptist describes him after his baptism as the Son of God (John:1:34|).
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:4:20 @{He closed the book} (\ptuxas to biblion\). Aorist active participle of \ptuss\. Rolled up the roll and gave it back to the attendant who had given it to him and who put it away again in its case. {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). Took his seat there as a sign that he was going to speak instead of going back to his former seat. This was the usual Jewish attitude for public speaking and teaching (Luke:5:3; strkjv@Matthew:5:1; strkjv@Mark:4:1; strkjv@Acts:16:13|). {Were fastened on him} (\san atenizontes auti\). Periphrastic imperfect active and so a vivid description. Literally, the eyes of all in the synagogue were gazing fixedly upon him. The verb \ateniz\ occurs in Aristotle and the Septuagint. It is from the adjective \atens\ and that from \tein\, to stretch, and copulative or intensive \a\, not \a\ privative. The word occurs in the N.T. here and in strkjv@22:56|, ten times in Acts, and in strkjv@2Corinthians:3:7,13|. Paul uses it of the steady eager gaze of the people at Moses when he came down from the mountain when he had been communing with God. There was something in the look of Jesus here that held the people spellbound for the moment, apart from the great reputation with which he came to them. In small measure every effective speaker knows what it is to meet the eager expectations of an audience.
rwp@Luke:4:25 @{Three years and six months} (\et tria kai mnas hex\). Accusative of duration of time without \epi\ (doubtful). The same period is given in strkjv@James:5:17|, the popular Jewish way of speaking. In strkjv@1Kings:18:1| the rain is said to have come in the third year. But the famine probably lasted still longer.
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:5:1 @{Pressed upon him} (\epikeisthai\). Luke in this paragraph (5:1-11; strkjv@Mark:1:16-20; strkjv@Matthew:4:18-22|) does not follow the chronology of Mark as he usually does. It seems reasonably clear that the renewed call of the four fishermen came before the first tour of Galilee in strkjv@Luke:4:42-44|. It is here assumed that Luke is describing in his own way the incident given in Mark and Matthew above. Luke singles out Simon in a graphic way. This verb \epikeisthai\ is an old one and means to \lie upon\, rest upon as of a stone on the tomb (John:11:38|) or of fish on the burning coals (John:21:9|). Songs:it is used of a tempest (Acts:27:20|) and of the urgent demands for Christ's crucifixion (Luke:23:23|). Here it vividly pictures the eager crowds around Jesus. \En ti epikeisthai\ is a favourite idiom with Luke as we have already seen, \en\ with the articular infinitive in the locative case. {That} (\kai\). \Kai\ does not technically mean the declarative conjunction "that," but it is a fair rendering of the somewhat awkward idiom of Luke to a certain extent imitating the Hebrew use of _wav_. {Was standing} (\n hests\). Periphrastic second past perfect of \histmi\ which here is equal to a practical imperfect. {By the lake} (\para tn limnn\). The use of the accusative with \para\, alongside, after a verb of rest used to be called the pregnant use, came and was standing. But that is no longer necessary, for the accusative as the case of extension is the oldest of the cases and in later Greek regains many of the earlier uses of the other cases employed for more precise distinctions. See the same idiom in verse 2|. We need not here stress the notion of extension. "With characteristic accuracy Luke never calls it a sea, while the others never call it a lake" (Plummer).
rwp@Luke:5:20 @{Their faith} (\tn pistin autn\). In all three Gospels. {Man} (\anthrpe\). Mark and Matthew have "child" or "Son" (\teknon\). Are forgiven (\aphentai\). This Doric form of the perfect passive indicative is for the Attic \apheintai\. It appears also in strkjv@Luke:5:23; strkjv@7:47,48; strkjv@John:20:23; strkjv@1John:2:12|. strkjv@Mark:2:6; strkjv@Matthew:9:2| have the present passive \aphientai\. Possibly this man's malady was due to his sin as is sometimes true (John:5:14|). The man had faith along with that of the four, but he was still a paralytic when Jesus forgave his sins.
rwp@Luke:6:6 @{On another sabbath} (\en heteri sabbati\). This was a second (\heteron\, as it often means), but not necessarily the next, sabbath. This incident is given by all three synoptics (Mark:3:1-6; strkjv@Matthew:12:9-14; strkjv@Luke:6:6-11|). See Matt. and Mark for details. Only Luke notes that it was on a sabbath. Was this because Luke as a physician had to meet this problem in his own practise? {Right hand} (\h dexia\). This alone in Luke, the physician's eye for particulars.
rwp@Luke:6:20 @{And he lifted up his eyes} (\kai autos eparas tous opthalmous autou\). First aorist active participle from \epair\. Note also Luke's favourite use of \kai autos\ in beginning a paragraph. Vivid detail alone in Luke. Jesus looked the vast audience full in the face. strkjv@Matthew:5:2| mentions that "he opened his mouth and taught them" (began to teach them, inchoative imperfect, \edidasken\). He spoke out so that the great crowd could hear. Some preachers do not open their mouths and do not look up at the people, but down at the manuscript and drawl along while the people lose interest and even go to sleep or slip out. {Ye poor} (\hoi ptchoi\). {The poor}, but "yours" (\humetera\) justifies the translation "ye." Luke's report is direct address in all the four beatitudes and four woes given by him. It is useless to speculate why Luke gives only four of the eight beatitudes in Matthew or why Matthew does not give the four woes in Luke. One can only say that neither professes to give a complete report of the sermon. There is no evidence to show that either saw the report of the other. They may have used a common source like Q (the Logia of Jesus) or they may have had separate sources. Luke's first beatitude corresponds with Matthew's first, but he does not have "in spirit" after "poor." Does Luke represent Jesus as saying that poverty itself is a blessing? It can be made so. Or does Luke represent Jesus as meaning what is in Matthew, poverty of spirit? {The kingdom of God} (\h basileia tou theou\). strkjv@Matthew:5:3| has "the kingdom of heaven" which occurs alone in Matthew though he also has the one here in Luke with no practical difference. The rabbis usually said "the kingdom of heaven." They used it of the political Messianic kingdom when Judaism of the Pharisaic sort would triumph over the world. The idea of Jesus is in the sharpest contrast to that conception here and always. See on ¯Matthew:3:2| for discussion of the meaning of the word "kingdom." It is the favourite word of Jesus for the rule of God in the heart here and now. It is both present and future and will reach a glorious consummation. Some of the sayings of Christ have apocalyptic and eschatological figures, but the heart of the matter is here in the spiritual reality of the reign of God in the hearts of those who serve him. The kingdom parables expand and enlarge upon various phases of this inward life and growth.
rwp@Luke:6:27 @{But I say unto you that hear} (\Alla humin leg tois akouousin\). There is a contrast in this use of \alla\ like that in strkjv@Matthew:5:44|. This is the only one of the many examples given by strkjv@Matthew:5| of the sharp antithesis between what the rabbis taught and what Jesus said. Perhaps that contrast is referred to by Luke. If necessary, \alla\ could be coordinating or paratactic conjunction as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11| rather than adversative as apparently here. See strkjv@Matthew:5:43f.| Love of enemies is in the O.T., but Jesus ennobles the word, \agapa\, and uses it of love for one's enemies.
rwp@Luke:7:19 @{Calling unto him} (\proskalesamenos\). First aorist middle (indirect) participle. {Two} (\duo tinas\). Certain two. Not in strkjv@Matthew:11:2|. {Saying} (\legn\). John saying by the two messengers. The message is given precisely alike in strkjv@Matthew:11:3|, which see. In both we have \heteron\ for "another," either a second or a different kind. In verse 20| Westcott and Hort read \allon\ in the text, \heteron\ in the margin. \Prosdokmen\, may be present indicative or present subjunctive (deliberative), the same contract form (\ao= , a \).
rwp@Luke:8:4 @{By a parable} (\dia parabols\). strkjv@Mark:4:2| says "in parables" as does strkjv@Matthew:13:3|. This is the beginning of the first great group of parables as given in strkjv@Mark:4:1-34| and strkjv@Matthew:13:1-53|. There are ten of these parables in Mark and Matthew and only two in strkjv@Luke:8:4-18| (The Sower and the Lamp, strkjv@8:16|) though Luke also has the expression "in parables" (8:10|). See strkjv@Matthew:13| and strkjv@Mark:4| for discussion of the word parable and the details of the Parable of the Sower. Luke does not locate the place, but he mentions the great crowds on hand, while both Mark and Matthew name the seaside as the place where Jesus was at the start of the series of parables.
rwp@Luke:8:16 @{When he hath lighted a lamp} (\luchnon hapsas\). It is a portable lamp (\luchnon\) that one lights (\hapsas\ aorist active participle of \hapt\, to kindle, fasten to, light). {With a vessel} (\skeuei\, instrumental case of \skeuos\). Here strkjv@Mark:4:21| has the more definite figure "under the bushel" as has strkjv@Matthew:5:15|. {Under the bed} (\hupokat klins\). Here strkjv@Mark:4:21| has the regular \hupo tn klinn\ instead of the late compound \hupokat\. Ragg notes that Matthew distributes the sayings of Jesus given here by strkjv@Luke:8:16-18; strkjv@Mark:4:21-25| concerning the parable of the lamp and gives them in three separate places (Matthew:5:15; strkjv@10:26; strkjv@13:12|). That is true, but it does not follow that Mark and Luke have bunched together separate sayings or that Matthew has scattered sayings delivered only on one occasion. One of the slowest lessons for some critics to learn is that Jesus repeated favourite sayings on different occasions and in different groupings just as every popular preacher and teacher does today. See on ¯Mark:4:21| for further discussion of the lamp and stand. {May see the light} (\Blepsin to phs\). In strkjv@Matthew:5:16| Jesus has it "may see your good works." The purpose of light is to let one see something else, not the light. Note present subjunctive (\blepsin\), linear action "Jesus had kindled a light within them. They must not hide it, but must see that it spreads to others" (Plummer). The parable of the lamp throws light on the parable of the sower.
rwp@Luke:8:55 @{Her spirit returned} (\epestrepsen to pneuma auts\). The life came back to her at once. {Be given her to eat} (\auti dothnai phagein\). The first infinitive \dothnai\ is an indirect command. The second \phagein\ (second aorist active of \esthi\) is epexegetic purpose.
rwp@Luke:9:33 @{As they were departing from him} (\en ti diachrizesthai autous ap' autou\). Peculiar to Luke and another instance of Luke's common idiom of \en\ with the articular infinitive in a temporal clause. This common verb occurs here only in the N.T. The present middle voice means to separate oneself fully (direct middle). This departing of Moses and Elijah apparently accompanied Peter's remark as given in all three Gospels. See for details on Mark and Matthew. {Master} (\Epistata\) here, {Rabbi} (Mark:9:5|), {Lord} (\Kurie\, strkjv@Matthew:17:4|). {Let us make} (\poismen\, first aorist active subjunctive) as in strkjv@Mark:9:5|, but strkjv@Matthew:17:4| has "I will make" (\pois\). It was near the time of the feast of the tabernacles. Songs:Peter proposes that they celebrate it up here instead of going to Jerusalem for it as they did a bit later (John:7|). {Not knowing what he said} (\m eids ho legei\). Literally, {not understanding what he was saying} (\m\, regular negative with participle and \legei\, present indicative retained in relative clause in indirect discourse). Luke puts it more bluntly than Mark (Peter's account), "For he wist not what to answer; for they became sore afraid" (Mark:9:6|). Peter acted according to his impulsive nature and spoke up even though he did not know what to say or even what he was saying when he spoke. He was only half awake as Luke explains and he was sore afraid as Mark (Peter) explains. He had bewilderment enough beyond a doubt, but it was Peter who spoke, not James and John.
rwp@Luke:9:61 @{And another also said} (\eipen de kai heteros\). A volunteer like the first. This third case is given by Luke alone, though the incident may also come from the same Logia as the other two. \Heteros\ does not here mean one of a "different" sort as is sometimes true of this pronoun, but merely another like \allos\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 749). {But first} (\prton de\). He also had something that was to come "first." {To bid farewell to them that are at my house} (\apotaxasthai tois eis ton oikon mou\). In itself that was a good thing to do. This first aorist middle infinitive is from \apotass\, an old verb, to detach, to separate, to assign as a detachment of soldiers. In the N.T. it only appears in the middle voice with the meaning common in late writers to bid adieu, to separate oneself from others. It is used in strkjv@Acts:18:18| of Paul taking leave of the believers in Corinth. See also strkjv@Mark:6:46; strkjv@2Corinthians:2:13|. It is thus a formal function and this man meant to go home and set things in order there and then in due time to come and follow Jesus.
rwp@Luke:10:8 @{Such things as are set before you} (\ta paratithemena humin\). The things placed before you from time to time (present passive participle, repetition). Every preacher needs this lesson of common politeness. These directions may seem perfunctory and even commonplace, but every teacher of young preachers knows how necessary they are. Hence they were given both to the Twelve and to the Seventy.
rwp@Luke:10:19 @{And over all the power of the enemy} (\kai epi psan tn dunamin tou echthrou\). This is the heart of "the authority" (\tn exousian\) here given by Jesus which is far beyond their expectations. The victory over demons was one phase of it. The power to tread upon serpents is repeated in strkjv@Mark:16:18| (the Appendix) and exemplified in Paul's case in Malta (Acts:28:3-5|). But protection from physical harm is not the main point in this struggle with Satan "the enemy" (Matthew:13:25; strkjv@Romans:16:20; strkjv@1Peter:5:8|). {Nothing shall in any wise hurt you} (\ouden hums ou m adiksei\). Text has future active indicative, while some MSS. read \adiksi\, aorist active subjunctive of \adike\, common verb from \adikos\ (\a\ privative and \dikos\), to suffer wrong, to do wrong. The triple negative here is very strong. Certainly Jesus does not mean this promise to create presumption or foolhardiness for he repelled the enemy's suggestion on the pinnacle of the temple.
rwp@Luke:11:1 @{As he was praying in a certain place} (\en ti einai auton en topi tini proseuchomenon\). Characteristically Lukan idiom: \en\ with articular periphrastic infinitive (\einai proseuchomenon\) with accusative of general reference (\auton\). {That}. Not in the Greek, asyndeton (\kai egeneto eipen\). {When he ceased} (\hs epausato\). Supply \proseuchomenos\ (praying), complementary or supplementary participle. {Teach us} (\didaxon hmas\). Jesus had taught them by precept (Matthew:6:7-15|) and example (Luke:9:29|). Somehow the example of Jesus on this occasion stirred them to fresh interest in the subject and to revival of interest in John's teachings (Luke:5:33|). Songs:Jesus gave them the substance of the Model Prayer in Matthew, but in shorter form. Some of the MSS. have one or all of the phrases in Matthew, but the oldest documents have it in the simplest form. See on ¯Matthew:6:7-15| for discussion of these details (Father, hallowed, kingdom, daily bread, forgiveness, bringing us into temptation). In strkjv@Matthew:6:11| "give" is \dos\ (second aorist active imperative second singular, a single act) while here strkjv@Luke:11:3| "give" is \didou\ (present active imperative, both from \didmi\) and means, "keep on giving." Songs:in strkjv@Luke:11:4| we have "For we ourselves also forgive" (\kai gar autoi aphiomen\), present active indicative of the late \\ verb \aphi\ while strkjv@Matthew:6:12| has "as we also forgave" (\hs kai hmeis aphkamen\), first aorist (\k\ aorist) active of \aphimi\. Songs:also where strkjv@Matthew:6:12| has "debts" (\ta opheilmata\) strkjv@Luke:11:4| has "sins" (\tas hamartias\). But the spirit of each prayer is the same. There is no evidence that Jesus meant either form to be a ritual. In both strkjv@Matthew:6:13; strkjv@Luke:11:4| \m eisenegkis\ occurs (second aorist subjunctive with \m\ in prohibition, ingressive aorist). "Bring us not" is a better translation than "lead us not." There is no such thing as God enticing one to sin (James:1:13|). Jesus urges us to pray not to be tempted as in strkjv@Luke:22:40| in Gethsemane.
rwp@Luke:11:22 @{But when} (\epan de\). Note \hotan\ in verse 21|. {Stronger than he} (\ischuroteros autou\). Comparative of \ischuros\ followed by the ablative. {Come upon him and overcome him} (\epelthn niksi auton\). Second aorist active participle of \eperchomai\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \nika\. Aorist tense here because a single onset while in verse 22| the guarding (\phulassi\, present active subjunctive) is continuous. {His whole armour} (\tn panoplian autou\). An old and common word for all the soldier's outfit (shield, sword, lance, helmet, greaves, breastplate). Tyndale renders it "his harness." In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Ephesians:6:11,13| where the items are given. {Wherein he trusted} (\eph' hi epepoithei\). Second past perfect active of \peith\, to persuade. The second perfect \pepoitha\ is intransitive, to trust. Old and common verb. He trusted his weapons which had been so efficacious. {His spoils} (\ta skula autou\). It is not clear to what this figure refers. Strong as Satan is Jesus is stronger and wins victories over him as he was doing then. In strkjv@Colossians:2:15| Christ is pictured as triumphing openly over the powers of evil by the Cross.
rwp@Luke:11:29 @{Were gathering together unto him} (\epathroizomenn\). Genitive absolute present middle participle of \epathroiz\, a rare verb, Plutarch and here only in the N.T., from \epi\ and \athroiz\ (a common enough verb). It means to throng together (\athroos\, in throngs). Vivid picture of the crowds around Jesus. {But the sign of Jonah} (\ei m to smeion In\). Luke does not give here the burial and resurrection of Jesus of which Jonah's experience in the big fish was a type (Matthew:12:39ff.|), but that is really implied (Plummer argues) by the use here of "shall be given" (\dothsetai\) and "shall be" (\estai\), for the resurrection of Jesus is still future. The preaching of Jesus ought to have been sign enough as in the case of Jonah, but the resurrection will be given. Luke's report is much briefer and omits what is in strkjv@Matthew:12:41|.
rwp@Luke:11:43 @{The chief seats in the synagogues} (\tn prtokathedrian en tais sunaggais\). Singular here, plural in strkjv@Matthew:23:6|. This semi-circular bench faced the congregation. strkjv@Matthew:23:6| has also the chief place at feasts given by Luke also in that discourse (20:46|) as well as in strkjv@14:7|, a marked characteristic of the Pharisees.
rwp@Luke:12:10 @{But unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Spirit} (\ti de eis to hagion pneuma blasphmsanti\). This unpardonable sin is given by strkjv@Mark:3:28f.; strkjv@Matthew:12:31f.| immediately after the charge that Jesus was in league with Beelzebub. Luke here separates it from the same charge made in Judea (11:15-20|). As frequently said, there is no sound reason for saying that Jesus only spoke his memorable sayings once. Luke apparently finds a different environment here. Note the use of \eis\ here in the sense of "against."
rwp@Luke:12:11 @{Be not anxious} (\m merimnste\). First aorist active subjunctive with \m\ in prohibition. Do not become anxious. See a similar command to the Twelve on their Galilean tour (Matthew:10:19f.|) and in the great discourse on the Mount of Olives at the end (Mark:13:11; strkjv@Luke:21:14f.|), given twice by Luke as we see. {How or what ye shall answer} (\ps ti apologssthe\). Indirect question and retaining the deliberative subjunctive \apologssthe\ and also \eipte\ (say).
rwp@Luke:12:22 @{Unto his disciples} (\pros tous mathtas autou\). Songs:Jesus turns from the crowd to the disciples (verses 22-40|, when Peter interrupts the discourse). From here to the end of the chapter Luke gives material that appears in Matthew, but not in one connection as here. In Matthew part of it is in the charge to the Twelve on their tour in Galilee, part in the eschatological discourse on the Mount of Olives. None of it is in Mark. Hence Q or the Logia seems to be the source of it. The question recurs again whether Jesus repeated on other occasions what is given here or whether Luke has here put together separate discourses as Matthew is held by many to have done in the Sermon on the Mount. We have no way of deciding these points. We can only say again that Jesus would naturally repeat his favourite sayings like other popular preachers and teachers. Songs:Luke:12:22-31| corresponds to strkjv@Matthew:6:25-33|, which see for detailed discussion. The parable of the rich fool was spoken to the crowd, but this exhortation to freedom from care (22-31|) is to the disciples. Songs:the language in strkjv@Luke:12:22| is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:6:25|. See there for \m merimnte\ (stop being anxious) and the deliberative subjunctive retained in the indirect question (\phagte, endussthe\). Songs:verse 23| here is the same in strkjv@Matthew:6:25| except that there it is a question with \ouch\ expecting the affirmative answer, whereas here it is given as a reason (\gar\, for) for the preceding command.
rwp@Luke:12:33 @{Sell that ye have} (\Plsate ta huparchonta humn\). Not in Matthew. Did Jesus mean this literally and always? Luke has been charged with Ebionism, but Jesus does not condemn property as inherently sinful. "The attempt to keep the letter of the rule here given (Acts:2:44,45|) had disastrous effects on the church of Jerusalem, which speedily became a church of paupers, constantly in need of alms (Romans:15:25,26; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@9:1|)" (Plummer). {Purses which wax not old} (\ballantia m palaioumena\). Songs:already \ballantion\ in strkjv@Luke:10:4|. Late verb \palaio\ from \palaios\, old, to make old, declare old as in strkjv@Hebrews:8:13|, is passive to become old as here and strkjv@Hebrews:1:11|. {That faileth not} (\anekleipton\). Verbal from \a\ privative and \ekleip\, to fail. Late word in Diodorus and Plutarch. Only here in the N.T. or LXX, but in papyri. "I prefer to believe that even Luke sees in the words not a mechanical rule, but a law for the spirit" (Bruce). {Draweth near} (\eggizei\). Instead of strkjv@Matthew:6:19| "dig through and steal." {Destroyeth} (\diaphtheirei\). Instead of "doth consume" in strkjv@Matthew:6:19|.
rwp@Luke:12:48 @{To whomsoever much is given} (\panti de hi edoth polu\). Here is inverse attraction from \hoi\ to \panti\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 767f.). Note \par' autou\ (from him) without any regard to \panti\. {They commit} (\parethento\). Second aorist middle indicative, timeless or gnomic aorist. Note the impersonal plural after the passive voice just before.
rwp@Luke:13:19 @{A grain of mustard seed} (\kokki sinapes\). Either the _sinapis nigra_ or the _salvadora persica_, both of which have small seeds and grow to twelve feet at times. The Jews had a proverb: "Small as a mustard seed." Given by strkjv@Mark:4:30-32; strkjv@Matthew:13:31f.| in the first great group of parables, but just the sort to be repeated. {Cast into his own garden} (\ebalen eis kpon heautou\). Different from "earth" (Mark) or "field" (Matthew.)" \Kpos\, old word for garden, only here in the N.T. and strkjv@John:19:1,26; strkjv@19:41|. {Became a tree} (\egeneto eis dendron\). Common Hebraism, very frequent in LXX, only in Luke in the N.T., but does appear in _Koin_ though rare in papyri; this use of \eis\ after words like _ginomai_. It is a translation Hebraism in Luke. {Lodged} (\katesknsen\). Mark and Matthew have \katasknoin\ infinitive of the same verb, to make tent (or nest).
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:14:18 @{With one consent} (\apo mias\). Some feminine substantive like \gnms\ or \psuchs\ has to be supplied. This precise idiom occurs nowhere else. It looked like a conspiracy for each one in his turn did the same thing. {To make excuse} (\paraiteisthai\). This common Greek verb is used in various ways, to ask something from one (Mark:15:6|), to deprecate or ask to avert (Hebrews:12:19|), to refuse or decline (Acts:25:11|), to shun or to avoid (2Timothy:2:23|), to beg pardon or to make excuses for not doing or to beg (Luke:14:18ff.|). All these ideas are variations of \aite\, to ask in the middle voice with \para\ in composition. {The first} (\ho prtos\). In order of time. There are three of the "many" ("all"), whose excuses are given, each more flimsy than the other. {I must needs} (\ech anagkn\). I have necessity. The land would still be there, a strange "necessity." {Have me excused} (\eche me paritmenon\). An unusual idiom somewhat like the English perfect with the auxiliary "have" and the modern Greek idiom with \ech\, but certainly not here a Greek periphrasis for \paritso\. This perfect passive participle is predicate and agrees with \me\. See a like idiom in strkjv@Mark:3:1; strkjv@Luke:12:19| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 902f.). The Latin had a similar idiom, _habe me excusatum_. Same language in verse 19|.
rwp@Luke:14:26 @{Hateth not} (\ou misei\). An old and very strong verb \mise\, to hate, detest. The orientals use strong language where cooler spirits would speak of preference or indifference. But even so Jesus does not here mean that one must hate his father or mother of necessity or as such, for strkjv@Matthew:15:4| proves the opposite. It is only where the element of choice comes in (cf. strkjv@Matthew:6:24|) as it sometimes does, when father or mother opposes Christ. Then one must not hesitate. The language here is more sharply put than in strkjv@Matthew:10:37|. The \ou\ here coalesces with the verb \misei\ in this conditional clause of the first class determined as fulfilled. It is the language of exaggerated contrast, it is true, but it must not be watered down till the point is gone. In mentioning "and wife" Jesus has really made a comment on the excuse given in verse 20| (I married a wife and so I am not able to come). {And his own life also} (\eti te kai tn psuchn heautou\). Note \te kai\, both--and. "The \te\ (B L) binds all the particulars into one bundle of _renuncianda_" (Bruce). Note this same triple group of conjunctions (\eti te kai\) in strkjv@Acts:21:28|, "And moreover also," "even going as far as his own life." Martyrdom should be an ever-present possibility to the Christian, not to be courted, but not to be shunned. Love for Christ takes precedence "over even the elemental instinct of self-preservation" (Ragg).
rwp@Luke:16:1 @{Unto the disciples} (\kai pros tous mathtas\). The three preceding parables in chapter 15 exposed the special faults of the Pharisees, "their hard exclusiveness, self-righteousness, and contempt for others" (Plummer). This parable is given by Luke alone. The \kai\ (also) is not translated in the Revised Version. It seems to mean that at this same time, after speaking to the Pharisees (chapter 15), Jesus proceeds to speak a parable to the disciples (16:1-13|), the parable of the Unjust Steward. It is a hard parable to explain, but Jesus opens the door by the key in verse 9|. {Which had a steward} (\hos ichen oikonomon\). Imperfect active, continued to have. Steward is house-manager or overseer of an estate as already seen in strkjv@Luke:12:42|. {Was accused} (\dieblth\). First aorist indicative passive, of \diaball\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T. It means to throw across or back and forth, rocks or words and so to slander by gossip. The word implies malice even if the thing said is true. The word \diabolos\ (slanderer) is this same root and it is used even of women, she-devils (1Timothy:3:11|). {That he was wasting} (\hs diaskorpizn\). For the verb see on ¯15:13|. The use of \hs\ with the participle is a fine Greek idiom for giving the alleged ground of a charge against one. {His goods} (\ta huparchonta autou\). "His belongings," a Lukan idiom.
rwp@Luke:16:2 @{What is this that I hear?} (\ti touto akou;\). There are several ways of understanding this terse Greek idiom. The Revised Version (above) takes \ti\ to be equal to \ti estin touto ho akou\; That is a possible use of the predicate \touto\. Another way is to take \ti\ to be exclamatory, which is less likely. Still another view is that \ti\ is " Why": "Why do I hear this about thee?" See strkjv@Acts:14:15| where that is the idiom employed. {Render} (\apodos\). Second aorist active imperative of \apodidmi\, Give back (and at once). {The account} (\ton logon\). The reckoning or report. Common use of \logos\. {Stewardship} (\oikonomias\). Same root as \oikonomos\ (steward). This demand does not necessarily mean dismissal if investigation proved him innocent of the charges. But the reason given implies that he is to be dismissed: {Thou canst no longer} (\ou gar duni\).
rwp@Luke:17:12 @{Which stood afar off} (\hoi anestsan porrthen\). The margin of Westcott and Hort reads simply \estsan\. The compound read by B means "rose up," but they stood at a distance (Leviticus:13:45f.|). The first healing of a leper (5:12-16|) like this is given by Luke only.
rwp@Luke:17:27 @{They ate, they drank, they married, they were given in marriage} (\sthion, epinon, egamoun, egamizonto\). Imperfects all of them vividly picturing the life of the time of Noah. But the other tenses are aorists (Noah entered \eislthen\, the flood came \lthen\, destroyed \aplesen\).
rwp@Luke:18:10 @{Stood} (\statheis\). First aorist passive participle of \histmi\. Struck an attitude ostentatiously where he could be seen. Standing was the common Jewish posture in prayer (Matthew:6:5; strkjv@Mark:11:25|). {Prayed thus} (\tauta prosucheto\). Imperfect middle, was praying these things (given following). {With himself} (\pros heauton\). A soliloquy with his own soul, a complacent recital of his own virtues for his own self-satisfaction, not fellowship with God, though he addresses God. {I thank thee} (\eucharist soi\). But his gratitude to God is for his own virtues, not for God's mercies to him. One of the rabbis offers a prayer like this of gratitude that he was in a class by himself because he was a Jew and not a Gentile, because he was a Pharisee and not of the _am-haaretz_ or common people, because he was a man and not a woman. {Extortioners} (\harpages\). An old word, \harpax\ from same root as \harpaz\, to plunder. An adjective of only one gender, used of robbers and plunderers, grafters, like the publicans (Luke:3:13|), whether wolves (Matthew:7:15|) or men (1Corinthians:5:19f.|). The Pharisee cites the crimes of which he is not guilty. {Or even} (\ kai\). As the climax of iniquity (Bruce), he points to "this publican." Zaccheus will admit robbery (Luke:19:8|). {God} (\ho theos\). Nominative form with the article as common with the vocative use of \theos\ (so verse 13; strkjv@John:20:28|).
rwp@Luke:20:45 @{In the hearing of all the people} (\akouontos pantos tou laou\). Genitive absolute, "while all the people were listening" (present active participle). That is the time to speak. The details in this verse and verse 47| are precisely those given in strkjv@Mark:12:38f.|, which see for discussion of details. strkjv@Matthew:23:1-39| has a very full and rich description of this last phase of the debate in the temple where Jesus drew a full-length portrait of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees and scribes in their presence. It was a solemn climax to this last public appearance of Christ in the temple when Jesus poured out the vials of his indignation as he had done before (Matthew:16:2; strkjv@Luke:11:37-54; 12-1|).
rwp@Luke:22:19 @{Which is given for you} (\to huper humn didomenon\). Some MSS. omit these verses though probably genuine. The correct text in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:24| has "which is for you," not "which is broken for you." It is curious to find the word "broken" here preserved and justified so often, even by Easton in his commentary on Luke, p. 320. {In remembrance of me} (\eis tn emn anamnsin\). Objective use of the possessive pronoun \emn\, not the subjective. {This do} (\touto poieite\). Present active indicative, repetition, keep on doing this.
rwp@Luke:22:30 @{And ye shall sit} (\kathsesthe\). But Westcott and Hort read in the text \kathsthe\ (present middle subjunctive with \hina\). The picture seems to be that given in strkjv@Matthew:19:28| when Jesus replied to Peter's inquiry. It is not clear how literally this imagery is to be taken. But there is the promise of honour for the loyal among these in the end.
rwp@Luke:22:51 @{Suffer us thus far} (\ete hes toutou\). Present active imperative of \ea\, to allow. But the meaning is not clear. If addressed to Peter and the other disciples it means that they are to suffer this much of violence against Jesus. This is probably the idea. If it is addressed to the crowd, it means that they are to excuse Peter for his rash act. {He touched his ear and healed him} (\hapsamenos tou otiou iasato auton\). Whether Jesus picked up the piece of the ear and put it back is not said. He could have healed the wound without that. This miracle of surgery is given alone by Luke.
rwp@Luke:22:66 @{As soon as it was day} (\hs egeneto hmera\). strkjv@Mark:15:1| (Matthew:27:1|) has "morning." {The assembly of the people} (\to presbuterion tou laou\). The technical word for "the eldership" (from \presbuteros\, an old man or elder) or group of the elders composing the Sanhedrin. The word occurs in the LXX for the Sanhedrin. In the N.T. occurs only here and strkjv@Acts:22:5| of the Sanhedrin. In strkjv@1Timothy:4:14| Paul uses it of the elders in a church (or churches). The Sanhedrin was composed of the elders and scribes and chief priests (Mark:15:1|) and all three groups are at this meeting. Luke's language (both chief priests and scribes, \te... kai\) seems to apply the word \presbuterion\ to the whole Sanhedrin. Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes) were nearly equally represented. {Into their council} (\eis to sunedrion autn\). The place of the gathering is not given, but Jesus was led into the council chamber.
rwp@Luke:23:4 @{The multitude} (\tous ochlous\). The first mention of them. It is now after daybreak. The procession of the Sanhedrin would draw a crowd (Plummer) and some may have come to ask for the release of a prisoner (Mark:15:8|). There was need of haste if the condemnation went through before friends of Jesus came. {I find no fault} (\ouden heurisk aition\). In the N.T. Luke alone uses this old adjective \aitios\ (Luke:23:4,14,22; strkjv@Acts:19:40|) except Heb. strkjv@5:9|. It means one who is the author, the cause of or responsible for anything. Luke does not give the explanation of this sudden decision of Pilate that Jesus is innocent. Evidently he held a careful examination before he delivered his judgment on the case. That conversation is given in strkjv@John:18:33-38|. Pilate took Jesus inside the palace from the upper gallery (John:18:33|) and then came out and rendered his decision to the Sanhedrin (John:18:38|) who would not go into the palace of Pilate (John:18:28|).
rwp@Luke:23:51 @{He had not consented to their counsel and deed} (\houtos ouk n sunkatatetheimenos ti bouli kai ti praxei autn\). This parenthesis is given by Luke alone and explains that, though a councillor (\bouleuts\, strkjv@Mark:5:43|) he had not agreed to the vote of the Sanhedrin. It is fairly certain that both Joseph and Nicodemus were suspected of sympathy with Jesus and so were not invited to the trial of Jesus. {Was looking for} (\prosedecheto\). Imperfect middle. strkjv@Mark:15:43| has the periphrastic imperfect (\n prosdechomenos\).
rwp@Luke:24:12 @This entire verse is a Western non-interpolation. This incident is given in complete form in strkjv@John:18:2-10| and most of the words in this verse are there also. It is of a piece with many items in this chapter about which it is not easy to reach a final conclusion. {Stooping and looking in} (\parakupsas\). First aorist active participle of \parakupt\, to stoop besides and peer into. Old verb used also in strkjv@John:20:5,11; strkjv@James:1:25; strkjv@1Peter:1:12|. {By themselves} (\mona\). Without the body. {To his home} (\pros hauton\). Literally, "to himself."
rwp@Mark:1:4 @{John came} (\egeneto Ians\). His coming was an epoch (\egeneto\), not a mere event (\n\). His coming was in accordance with the prophetic picture (\kaths\, strkjv@1:2|). Note the same verb about John in strkjv@John:1:6|. The coming of John the Baptizer was the real beginning of the spoken message about Christ. He is described as {the baptizing one} (\ho haptizn\) in the wilderness (\en ti ermi\). The baptizing took place in the River Jordan (Mark:1:5,9|) which was included in the general term the wilderness or the deserted region of Judea. {Preached the baptism of repentance} (\krussn baptisma metanoias\). Heralded a repentance kind of baptism (genitive case, genus case), a baptism marked by repentance. See on ¯Matthew:3:2| for discussion of repent, an exceedingly poor rendering of John's great word \metanoias\. He called upon the Jews to change their minds and to turn from their sins, "confessing their sins" (\exomologoumenoi tas hamartias autn\). See strkjv@Matthew:3:16|. The public confessions produced a profound impression as they would now. {Unto remission of sins} (\eis aphesin hamartin\). This is a difficult phrase to translate accurately. Certainly John did not mean that the baptism was the means of obtaining the forgiveness of their sins or necessary to the remission of sins. The trouble lies in the use of \eis\ which sometimes is used when purpose is expressed, but sometimes when there is no such idea as in strkjv@Matthew:10:41| and strkjv@Matthew:12:41|. Probably "with reference to" is as good a translation here as is possible. The baptism was on the basis of the repentance and confession of sin and, as Paul later explained (Romans:6:4|), was a picture of the death to sin and resurrection to new life in Christ. This symbol was already in use by the Jews for proselytes who became Jews. John is treating the Jewish nation as pagans who need to repent, to confess their sins, and to come back to the kingdom of God. The baptism in the Jordan was the objective challenge to the people.
rwp@Mark:1:34 @{Devils} (\daimonia\). Demons it should be translated always. {Suffered not} (\ouk phien\). Would not allow, imperfect tense of continued refusal. The reason given is "because they knew him" (\hoti ideisan auton\). Whether "to be Christ" (\Christon einai\) is genuine or not, that is the meaning and is a direct reference to strkjv@1:24| when in the synagogue the demon recognized and addressed Jesus as the Holy One of God. Testimony from such a source was not calculated to help the cause of Christ with the people. He had told the other demon to be silent. See on ¯Matthew:8:29| for discussion of the word demon.
rwp@Mark:2:4 @{Come nigh} (\proseggisai\). But Westcott and Hort read \prosenegkai\, to bring to, after Aleph, B, L, 33, 63 (cf. strkjv@John:5:18|). {They uncovered the roof} (\apestegasan tn stegn\). They unroofed the roof (note paronomasia in the Greek and cognate accusative). The only instance of this verb in the N.T. A rare word in late Greek, no papyrus example given in Moulton and Milligan _Vocabulary_. They climbed up a stairway on the outside or ladder to the flat tile roof and dug out or broke up (\exoruxantes\) the tiles (the roof). There were thus tiles (\dia tn keramn\, strkjv@Luke:5:19|) of laths and plaster and even slabs of stone stuck in for strength that had to be dug out. It is not clear where Jesus was (\hopou n\), either downstairs, (Holtzmann) or upstairs (Lightfoot), or in the quadrangle (_atrium_ or _compluvium_, if the house had one). "A composition of mortar, tar, ashes and sand is spread upon the roofs, and rolled hard, and grass grows in the crevices. On the houses of the poor in the country the grass grows more freely, and goats may be seen on the roofs cropping it" (Vincent). {They let down the bed} (\chalsi ton krabatton\), historical present again, aorist tense in strkjv@Luke:5:19| (\kathkan\). The verb means to lower from a higher place as from a boat. Probably the four men had a rope fastened to each corner of the pallet or poor man's bed (\krabatton\, Latin _grabatus_. Songs:one of Mark's Latin words). Matthew (Matthew:9:2|) has \klin\, general term for bed. Luke has \klinidion\ (little bed or couch). Mark's word is common in the papyri and is spelled also \krabbatos\, sometimes \krabatos\, while W, Codex Washingtonius, has it \krabbaton\.
rwp@Mark:2:5 @{Their faith} (\tn pistin autn\). The faith of the four men and of the man himself. There is no reason for excluding his faith. They all had confidence in the power and willingness of Jesus to heal this desperate case. {Are forgiven} (\aphientai\, aoristic present passive, cf. punctiliar action, Robertson's _Grammar_, pp. 864ff.). Songs:Matthew:9:3|, but strkjv@Luke:5:20| has the Doric perfect passive \aphentai\. The astonishing thing both to the paralytic and to the four friends is that Jesus forgave his sins instead of healing him. The sins had probably caused the paralysis.
rwp@Mark:2:10 @{That ye may know} (\hina eidte\). The scribes could have said either of the alternatives in verse 9| with equal futility. Jesus could say either with equal effectiveness. In fact Jesus chose the harder first, the forgiveness which they could not see. Songs:he now performs the miracle of healing which all could see, that all could know that (the Son of Man, Christ's favourite designation of himself, a claim to be the Messiah in terms that could not be easily attacked) he really had the authority and power (\exousian\) to forgive sins. He has the right and power here on earth to forgive sins, here and now without waiting for the day of judgment. {He saith to the sick of the palsy} (\legei\). This remarkable parenthesis in the middle of the sentence occurs also in strkjv@Matthew:9:6| and strkjv@Luke:5:24|, proof that both Matthew and Luke followed Mark's narrative. It is inconceivable that all three writers should independently have injected the same parenthesis at the same place.
rwp@Mark:2:28 @{Even of the sabbath} (\kai tou sabbatou\). Mark, Matthew (Matthew:12:8|), and Luke (Luke:6:5|) all give this as a climax in the five reasons given by Christ on the occasion for the conduct of the disciples, but Mark has the little word "even" (\kai\) not in the others, showing that Jesus knew that he was making a great claim as the Son of Man, the Representative Man, the Messiah looked at from his human interest, to lordship (\kurios\) even of the sabbath. He was not the slave of the sabbath, but the master of it. "Even of the sabbath, so invaluable in your eyes. Lord, not to abolish, but to interpret and keep in its own place, and give it a new name" (Bruce).
rwp@Mark:3:11 @{Whensoever they beheld him} (\hotan auton etheroun\). Imperfect indicative with \hotan\ of repeated action. They kept falling down before him (\prosepipton\) and crying, (\ekrazon\) and he kept charging or rebuking (\epitim\) them, all imperfects. The unclean spirits (demons) recognize Jesus as the Son of God, as before. Jesus charged them not to make him known as he had also done before. He did not wish this testimony. It was a most exciting ordeal and is given only by Mark. Note non-final use of \hina\.
rwp@Mark:3:17 @{Boanerges, which is Sons of thunder} (\Boanrges ho estin huioi bronts\). This Hebrew nickname is given only by Mark and the reason for it is not clear. It may refer to the fiery temperament revealed in strkjv@Luke:9:34| when James and John wanted to call down fire on the Samaritan villages that were unfriendly to them. The word literally means {sons of tumult, sons of thunder} in Syriac. No other epithets are given by Mark save descriptions to distinguish as Simon the Cananaean (or Zealot) and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him (verse 19|). Andrew, (from \anr\, a man) and Philip (Philippos, fond of horses) are both Greek names. Bartholomew, son of Tolmai, is the Nathanael of John's Gospel (John:21:2|). He probably had both names. Matthew is a Hebrew name meaning gift of God (\Maththaios\). Thomas is Hebrew and means Twin (Didymus, strkjv@John:11:16|). There are two uses of the name of James (\Iacbos\, Jacob). Thaddeus is another name for Lebbaeus.
rwp@Mark:3:19 @{He cometh into a house} (\erchetai eis oikon\). Historical present again and no article with noun. He comes home from the mountain, probably the house of Simon as in strkjv@1:29|. Mark passes by the Sermon on the Mount given by Matthew and Luke on the mountain (plateau on the mountain in Luke). We have to allow a reasonable interval for Mark's narrative. Mark's Gospel is full of action and does not undertake to tell all that Jesus did and said.
rwp@Mark:4:2 @{He taught them} (\edidasken autous\). Imperfect tense describing it as going on. {In parables} (\en parabolais\). As in strkjv@3:23|, only here more extended parables. See on ¯Matthew:13| for discussion concerning Christ's use of parables. Eight are given there, one (the Lamp both in strkjv@Mark:4:21| and strkjv@Luke:8:16| (both Sower and the Lamp in Luke), one alone in strkjv@Mark:4:26-29| (seed growing of itself) not in Matthew or Luke, ten on this occasion. Only four are mentioned in strkjv@Mark:4:1-34| (The Sower, the Lamp, the Seed Growing of Itself, the Mustard Seed). But Mark adds (4:34|) "without a parable spake he not unto them," clearly meaning that Jesus spoke many others on this occasion and Matt. after mentioning eight (Matthew:13:34|) makes the same statement. Manifestly, therefore, Jesus spoke many parables on this day and all theories of exegesis or dispensations on the basis of the number of these kingdom parables are quite beside the mark. In beginning Jesus said: {Hearken} (\Akouete\). It is significant that even Jesus had to ask people to listen when he spoke. See also verse 9|.
rwp@Mark:4:11 @{Unto you is given the mystery of the kingdom of God} (\Humin to mustrion dedotai ts basileias tou theou\). See on ¯Matthew:13:11| for word \mustrion\. Here (Mark:4:11; strkjv@Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Luke:8:10|) alone in the Gospels, but in Paul 21 times and in the Revelation 4 times. It is frequent in Daniel and O.T. Apocrypha. Matthew and Luke use it here in the plural. Matthew and Luke add the word {to know} (\gnnai\), but Mark's presentation covers a wider range than growing knowledge, the permanent possession of the mystery even before they understand it. The secret is no longer hidden from the initiated. Discipleship means initiation into the secret of God's kingdom and it will come gradually to these men. {But unto them that are without} (\ekeinois de tois ex\). Peculiar to Mark, those outside our circle, the uninitiated, the hostile group like the scribes and Pharisees, who were charging Jesus with being in league with Beelzebub. strkjv@Luke:8:10| has "to the rest" (\tois loipois\), strkjv@Matthew:13:11| simply "to them" (\ekeinois\). Without the key the parables are hard to understand, for parables veil the truth of the kingdom being stated in terms of another realm. Without a spiritual truth and insight they are unintelligible and are often today perverted. The parables are thus a condemnation on the wilfully blind and hostile, while a guide and blessing to the enlightened. {That} (\hina\). Mark has the construction of the Hebrew "lest" of strkjv@Isaiah:6:9f|. with the subjunctive and so strkjv@Luke:8:10|, while strkjv@Matthew:13:13| uses causal \hoti\ with the indicative following the LXX. See on ¯Matthew:13:13| for the so-called causal use of \hina\. Gould on strkjv@Mark:4:12| has an intelligent discussion of the differences between Matthew and Mark and Luke. He argues that Mark here probably "preserves the original form of Jesus' saying." God ironically commands Isaiah to harden the hearts of the people. If the notion of purpose is preserved in the use of \hina\ in Mark and Luke, there is probably some irony also in the sad words of Jesus. If \hina\ is given the causative use of \hoti\ in Matthew, the difficulty disappears. What is certain is that the use of parables on this occasion was a penalty for judicial blindness on those who will not see.
rwp@Mark:4:12 @{Lest haply they should turn again, and it should be forgiven them} (\mpote epistrepssin kai aphethi autois\). Luke does not have these difficult words that seem in Isaiah to have an ironical turn, though strkjv@Matthew:13:15| does retain them even after using \hoti\ for the first part of the quotation. There is no way to make \mpote\ in strkjv@Mark:4:12| and strkjv@Matthew:13:15| have a causal sense. It is the purpose of condemnation for wilful blindness and rejection such as suits the Pharisees after their blasphemous accusation against Jesus. Bengel says: _iam ante non videbant, nunc accedit iudicium divinum_. Jesus is pronouncing their doom in the language of Isaiah. It sounds like the dirge of the damned.
rwp@Mark:4:22 @{Save that it should be manifested} (\ean m hina phanerthi\). Note \ean m\ and \hina\. strkjv@Luke:8:17| has it {that shall not be made manifest} (\ho ou phaneron gensetai\). Here in Mark it is stated that the temporary concealment is for final manifestation and a means to that end. Those who are charged with the secret at this time are given the set responsibility of proclaiming it on the housetops after Ascension (Swete). The hidden (\krupton\) and the {secret} (\apokruphon\) are to be revealed in due time.
rwp@Mark:4:27 @{Should sleep and rise} (\katheudi kai egeirtai\). Present subjunctive for continued action. Songs:also {spring up and grow} (\blasti kai mkuntai\) two late verbs. The process of growth goes on all night and all day (\nukta kai hmeran\, accusative of time). {He knoweth not how} (\hs ouk oiden autos\). Note position of \hs\ (beginning) and \autos\ (end) of clause: {How knows not he}. The mystery of growth still puzzles farmers and scientists of today with all our modern knowledge. But nature's secret processes do not fail to operate because we are ignorant. This secret and mysterious growth of the kingdom in the heart and life is the point of this beautiful parable given only by Mark. "When man has done his part, the actual process of growth is beyond his reach or comprehension" (Swete).
rwp@Mark:4:34 @{But privately to his disciples he expounded all things} (\kat' idian de tois idiois mathtais epeluen panta\). To his own (\idiois\) disciples in private, in distinction from the mass of the people Jesus was in the habit (imperfect tense, \epeluen\) of {disclosing}, revealing, all things (\panta\) in plain language without the parabolic form used before the crowds. This verb \epilu\ occurs in the N.T. only here and in strkjv@Acts:19:39| where the town-clerk of Ephesus says of the troubles by the mob: "It shall be settled in the regular assembly" (\en ti ennomi ekklsii epiluthsetai\). First future passive indicative from \epilu\. The word means to give additional (\epi\) loosening (\lu\), so to explain, to make plainer, clearer, even to the point of revelation. This last is the idea of the substantive in strkjv@2Peter:1:20| where even the Revised Version has it: "No prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation" (\psa prophteia graphs idias epiluses ou ginetai\). Here the use of \ginetai\ (comes) with the ablative case (\epiluses\) and the explanation given in verse strkjv@2Peter:1:21| shows plainly that disclosure or revelation to the prophet is what is meant, not interpretation of what the prophet said. The prophetic impulse and message came from God through the Holy Spirit. In private the further disclosures of Jesus amounted to fresh revelations concerning the mysteries of the kingdom of God.
rwp@Mark:5:26 @{Had suffered many things of many physicians} (\polla pathousa hupo polln iatrn\). A pathetic picture of a woman with a chronic case who had tried doctor after doctor. {Had spent all that she had} (\dapansasa ta par' auts panta\). Having spent the all from herself, all her resources. For the idiom with \para\ see strkjv@Luke:10:7; strkjv@Phillipians:4:18|. The tragedy of it was that she "was nothing bettered, but rather grew worse" (\mden pheltheisa alla mllon eis to cheiron elthousa\). Her money was gone, her disease was gaining on her, her one chance came now with Jesus. Matthew says nothing about her experience with the doctors and strkjv@Luke:8:43| merely says that she "had spent all her living upon physicians and could not be healed of any," a plain chronic case. Luke the physician neatly takes care of the physicians. But they were not to blame. She had a disease that they did not know how to cure. Vincent quotes a prescription for an issue of blood as given in the Talmud which gives one a most grateful feeling that he is not under the care of doctors of that nature. The only parallel today is Chinese medicine of the old sort before modern medical schools came.
rwp@Mark:5:43 @{That no one should know this} (\hina mdeis gnoi touto\). Second aorist active subjunctive, \gnoi\. But would they keep still about it? There was the girl besides. Both Mark and Luke note that Jesus ordered that food be given to the child {given her to eat}, (\dothnai auti phagein\), a natural care of the Great Physician. Two infinitives here (first aorist passive and second aorist active). "She could walk and eat; not only alive, but well" (Bruce).
rwp@Mark:6:8 @{Save a staff only} (\ei m rabdon monon\). Every traveller and pilgrim carried his staff. Bruce thinks that Mark has here preserved the meaning of Jesus more clearly than strkjv@Matthew:10:10| (nor staff) and strkjv@Luke:9:3| (neither staff). This discrepancy has given trouble to commentators. Grotius suggests no second staff for Matthew and Luke. Swete considers that Matthew and Luke report "an early exaggeration of the sternness of the command." "Without even a staff is the _ne plus ultra_ of austere simplicity, and self-denial. Men who carry out the spirit of these precepts will not labour in vain" (Bruce).
rwp@Mark:6:22 @{The daughter of Herodias herself} (\ts thugatros auts Hridiados\). Genitive absolute again. Some ancient manuscripts read \autou\ (his, referring to Herod Antipas. Songs:Westcott and Hort) instead of \auts\ (herself). In that case the daughter of Herodias would also have the name Herodias as well as Salome, the name commonly given her. That is quite possible in itself. It was toward the close of the banquet, when all had partaken freely of the wine, that Herodias made her daughter come in and dance (\eiselthouss kai orchsamens\) in the midst (Matthew). "Such dancing was an almost unprecedented thing for women of rank, or even respectability. It was mimetic and licentious, and performed by professionals" (Gould). Herodias stooped thus low to degrade her own daughter like a common \hetaira\ in order to carry out her set purpose against John. {She pleased Herod and them that sat at meat} (\resen Hridi kai tois sunanakeimenois\). The maudlin group lounging on the divans were thrilled by the licentious dance of the half-naked princess. {Whatsoever thou wilt} (\ho ean thelis\) The drunken Tetrarch had been caught in the net of Herodias. It was a public promise.
rwp@Mark:6:38 @{Go and see} (\hupagete idete\). John says that Jesus asked Philip to find out what food they had (John:6:5f.|) probably after the disciples had suggested that Jesus send the crowd away as night was coming on (Mark:6:35f.|). On this protest to his command that they feed the crowds (Mark:6:37; strkjv@Matthew:14:16; strkjv@Luke:9:13|) Jesus said "Go see" how many loaves you can get hold of. Then Andrew reports the fact of the lad with five barley loaves and two fishes (John:6:8f.|). They had suggested before that two hundred pennyworth (\dnarin diakosin\. See on ¯Matthew:18:28|) was wholly inadequate and even that (some thirty-five dollars) was probably all that or even more than they had with them. John's Gospel alone tells of the lad with his lunch which his mother had given him.
rwp@Mark:8:12 @{He sighed deeply in his spirit} (\anastenaxas ti pneumati\). The only instance of this compound in the N.T. though in the LXX. The uncompounded form occurs in strkjv@Mark:7:34| and it is common enough. The preposition \ana-\ intensifies the meaning of the verb (perfective use). "The sigh seemed to come, as we say, from the bottom of his heart, the Lord's human spirit was stirred to its depths" (Swete). Jesus resented the settled prejudice of the Pharisees (and now Sadducees also) against him and his work. {There shall no sign be given unto this generation} (\ei dothsetai ti genei tauti smeion\). strkjv@Matthew:16:4| has simply \ou dothsetai\, plain negative with the future passive indicative. Mark has \ei\ instead of \ou\, which is technically a conditional clause with the conclusion unexpressed (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1024), really aposiopesis in imitation of the Hebrew use of \im\. This is the only instance in the N.T. except in quotations from the LXX (Hebrews:3:11; strkjv@4:3,5|). It is very common in the LXX. The rabbis were splitting hairs over the miracles of Jesus as having a possible natural explanation (as some critics do today) even if by the power of Beelzebub, and those not of the sky (from heaven) which would be manifested from God. Songs:they put up this fantastic test to Jesus which he deeply resents. strkjv@Matthew:16:4| adds "but the sign of Jonah" mentioned already by Jesus on a previous occasion (Matthew:12:39-41|) at more length and to be mentioned again (Luke:11:32|). But the mention of the sign of Jonah was "an absolute refusal of signs in their sense" (Bruce). And when he did rise from the dead on the third day, the Sanhedrin refused to be convinced (see Acts 3 to 5).
rwp@Mark:8:23 @{Brought him out of the village} (\exnegken auton ex ts kms\). It had been a village, but Philip had enlarged it and made it a town or city (\polis\), though still called a village (verses 23,26|). As in the case of the deaf and dumb demoniac given also alone by Mark (Mark:7:31-37|), so here Jesus observes the utmost secrecy in performing the miracle for reasons not given by Mark. It was the season of retirement and Jesus is making the fourth withdrawal from Galilee. That fact may explain it. The various touches here are of interest also. Jesus led him out by the hand, put spittle on his eyes (using the poetical and _Koin_ papyri word \ommata\ instead of the usual \opthalmous\), and laid his hands upon him, perhaps all this to help the man's faith.
rwp@Mark:8:24 @{I see men, for I behold them as trees walking} (\Blep tous anthrpous hoti hs dendra hor peripatountas\). A vivid description of dawning sight. His vision was incomplete though he could tell that they were men because they were walking. This is the single case of a gradual cure in the healings wrought by Jesus. The reason for this method in this case is not given.
rwp@Mark:8:32 @{Spake the saying openly} (\parrsii ton logon elalei\). He held back nothing, told it all (\pn\, all, \rsia\, from \eipon\, say), without reserve, to all of them. Imperfect tense \elalei\ shows that Jesus did it repeatedly. Mark alone gives this item. Mark does not give the great eulogy of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:17,19| after his confession (Mark:8:29; strkjv@Matthew:16:16; strkjv@Luke:9:20|), but he does tell the stinging rebuke given Peter by Jesus on this occasion. See discussion on ¯Matthew:16:21,26|.
rwp@Mark:9:31 @{For he taught} (\edidasken gar\). Imperfect tense, and the reason given for secrecy. He was renewing again definitely the prediction of his death in Jerusalem some six months ahead as he had done before (Mark:8:31; strkjv@Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Luke:9:22|). Now as then Jesus foretells his resurrection "after three days" ("the third day," strkjv@Matthew:17:23|).
rwp@Mark:11:16 @{Through the temple} (\dia tou hierou\). The temple authorities had prohibited using the outer court of the temple through the Precinct as a sort of short cut or by-path from the city to the Mount of Olives. But the rule was neglected and all sorts of irreverent conduct was going on that stirred the spirit of Jesus. This item is given only in Mark. Note the use of \hina\ after \phie\ (imperfect tense) instead of the infinitive (the usual construction).
rwp@Mark:12:42 @{One poor widow} (\mia chra ptch\). Luke has \penichra\, a poetical late form of \pens\. In the N.T. the \ptchos\ is the pauper rather than the mere peasant, the extreme opposite of the rich (\plousioi\). The money given by most was copper (\chalkon\). {Two mites} (\duo lepta\). \Leptos\ means peeled or stripped and so very thin. Two \lepta\ were about two-fifths of a cent. {Farthing} (\kodrantes\, Latin _quadrans_, a quarter of an _as_).
rwp@Mark:13:4 @{Tell us, when shall these things be?} (\Eipon hmin pote tauta estai;\). The Revised Version punctuates it as a direct question, but Westcott and Hort as an indirect inquiry. They asked about the {when} (\pote\) and the {what sign} (\ti smeion\). strkjv@Matthew:24:3| includes "the sign of thy coming and the end of the world," showing that these tragic events are brought before Jesus by the disciples. See discussion of the interpretation of this discourse on ¯Matthew:24:3|. This chapter in Mark is often called "The Little Apocalypse" with the notion that a Jewish apocalypse has been here adapted by Mark and attributed to Jesus. Many of the theories attribute grave error to Jesus or to the Gospels on this subject. The view adopted in the discussion in Matthew is the one suggested here, that Jesus blended in one picture his death, the destruction of Jerusalem within that generation, the second coming and end of the world typified by the destruction of the city. The lines between these topics are not sharply drawn in the report and it is not possible for us to separate the topics clearly. This great discourse is the longest preserved in Mark and may be due to Peter. Mark may have given it in order "to forewarn and forearm" (Bruce) the readers against the coming catastrophe of the destruction of Jerusalem. Both Matthew (Matthew:24|) and Luke (Luke:21:5-36|) follow the general line of Mark 13 though strkjv@Matthew:24:43-25:46| presents new material (parables).
rwp@Mark:14:33 @{Greatly amazed and sore troubled} (\ekthambeisthai kai admonein\). strkjv@Matthew:26:37| has "sorrowful and sore troubled." See on Matt. about \admonein\. Mark alone uses \exthambeisthai\ (here and in strkjv@9:15|). There is a papyrus example given by Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_. The verb \thambe\ occurs in strkjv@Mark:10:32| for the amazement of the disciples at the look of Jesus as he went toward Jerusalem. Now Jesus himself feels amazement as he directly faces the struggle in the Garden of Gethsemane. He wins the victory over himself in Gethsemane and then he can endure the loss, despising the shame. For the moment he is rather amazed and homesick for heaven. "Long as He had foreseen the Passion, when it came clearly into view its terror exceeded His anticipations" (Swete). "He learned from what he suffered," (Hebrews:5:8|) and this new experience enriched the human soul of Jesus.
rwp@Mark:14:44 @{Token} (\sussmon\). A common word in the ancient Greek for a concerted signal according to agreement. It is here only in the New Testament. strkjv@Matthew:26:48| has \smeion\, sign. The signal was the kiss by Judas, a contemptible desecration of a friendly salutation. {And lead him away safely} (\kai apagete asphals\). Only in Mark. Judas wished no slip to occur. Mark and Matthew do not tell of the falling back upon the ground when Jesus challenged the crowd with Judas. It is given by John alone (John:18:4-9|).
rwp@Mark:15:33 @{The sixth hour} (\hras hekts\). That is, noon (Jewish time), as the third hour was nine A.M. (Mark:15:25|). See on ¯Matthew:27:45| for discussion. Given also by strkjv@Luke:23:44|. Mark gives the Aramaic transliteration as does B in strkjv@Matthew:27:45|, which see for discussion. {Forsaken} (\egkatelipes\). Some MSS. give \neidisas\ (reproached). We are not able to enter into the fulness of the desolation felt by Jesus at this moment as the Father regarded him as sin (2Corinthians:5:21|). This desolation was the deepest suffering. He did not cease to be the Son of God. That would be impossible.
rwp@Mark:16:9 @{When he had risen early on the first day of the week} (\anastas pri prti sabbatou\). It is probable that this note of time goes with "risen" (\anastas\), though it makes good sense with "appeared" (\ephan\). Jesus is not mentioned by name here, though he is clearly the one meant. Mark uses \mia\ in verse 2|, but \prt\ in strkjv@14:12| and the plural \sabbatn\ in verse 2|, though the singular here. {First} (\prton\). Definite statement that Jesus {appeared} (\ephan\) to Mary Magdalene first of all. The verb \ephan\ (second aorist passive of \phain\) is here alone of the Risen Christ (cf. \Eleias ephan\, strkjv@Luke:9:8|), the usual verb being \phth\ (Luke:24:34; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:5ff.|). {From whom} (\par' hs\). Only instance of \para\ with the casting out of demons, \ek\ being usual (1:25,26; strkjv@5:8; strkjv@7:26,29; strkjv@9:25|). \Ekbeblkei\ is past perfect indicative without augment. This description of Mary Magdalene is like that in strkjv@Luke:8:2| and seems strange in Mark at this point, described as a new character here, though mentioned by Mark three times just before (15:40,47; strkjv@16:1|). The appearance to Mary Magdalene is given in full by strkjv@John:20:11-18|.
rwp@Mark:16:15 @{To the whole creation} (\psi ti ktisei\). This commission in Mark is probably another report of the missionary _Magna Charta_ in strkjv@Matthew:28:16-20| spoken on the mountain in Galilee. One commission has already been given by Christ (John:20:21-23|). The third appears in strkjv@Luke:24:44-49; strkjv@Acts:1:3-8|.
rwp@Info_Matthew @ If the book is genuine, as I believe, the date becomes a matter of interest. Here again there is nothing absolutely decisive save that it is later than the Gospel according to Mark which it apparently uses. If Mark is given an early date, between A.D. 50 to 60, then Matthew's book may be between 60 and 70, though many would place it between 70 and 80. It is not certain whether Luke wrote after Matthew or not, though that is quite possible. There is no definite use of Matthew by Luke that has been shown. One guess is as good as another and each decides by his own predilections. My own guess is that A.D. 60 is as good as any.
rwp@Info_Matthew @ There are ten parables in Matthew not in the other Gospels: The Tares, the Hid Treasure, the Net, the Pearl of Great Price, the Unmerciful Servant, the Labourers in the Vineyard, the Two Sons, the Marriage of the King's Son, the Ten Virgins, the Talents. The only miracles in Matthew alone are the Two Blind Men, the Coin in the Mouth of the Fish. But Matthew gives the narrative of the Birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph while Luke tells that wonderful story from the standpoint of Mary. There are details of the Death and Resurrection given by Matthew alone.
rwp@Info_Matthew @ THE TITLE The Textus Receptus has "The Holy Gospel according to Matthew" (\to kata Matthaion hagion Euaggelion\), though the Elzevirs omit "holy," not agreeing here with Stephanus, Griesbach, and Scholz. Only minuscules (cursive Greek manuscripts) and all late have the adjective. Other minuscules and nine uncials including W (the Washington Codex of the fifth century), C of the fifth century (the palimpsest manuscript) and Delta of the ninth together with most Latin manuscripts have simply "Gospel according to Matthew" (\Euaggelion kata Matthaion\). But Aleph and B the two oldest and best Greek uncials of the fourth century have only "According to Matthew" (\Kata Maththaion\) (note double th) and the Greek uncial D of the fifth or sixth century follows Aleph and B as do some of the earliest Old Latin manuscripts and the Curetonian Syriac. It is clear, therefore, that the earliest form of the title was simply "According to Matthew." It may be doubted if Matthew (or the author, if not Matthew) had any title at all. The use of "according to" makes it plain that the meaning is not "the Gospel of Matthew," but the Gospel as given by Matthew, \secundum Matthaeum\, to distinguish the report by Matthew from that by Mark, by Luke, by John. Least of all is there any authority in the manuscripts for saying "Saint Matthew," a Roman Catholic practice observed by some Protestants.
rwp@Matthew:1:1 @{Jesus Christ}. Both words are used. The first is the name (\Isous\) given by the angel to Mary (Matthew:1:21|) which describes the mission of the child. The second was originally a verbal adjective (\christos\) meaning anointed from the verb to anoint (\chri\). It was used often in the Septuagint as an adjective like "the anointed priest" (1Kings:2:10|) and then as a substantive to translate the Hebrew word "Messiah" (\Messias\). Songs:Andrew said to Simon: "We have found the Messiah, which is, being interpreted, Christ" (John:1:41|). In the Gospels it is sometimes "the Anointed One," "the Messiah," but finally just a proper name as here, Jesus Christ. Paul in his later Epistles usually has it "Christ Jesus."
rwp@Matthew:1:1 @{The Son of David, the son of Abraham} (\huiou Daueid huiou Abraam\). Matthew proposes to show that Jesus Christ is on the human side the son of David, as the Messiah was to be, and the son of Abraham, not merely a real Jew and the heir of the promises, but the promise made to Abraham. Songs:Matthew begins his line with Abraham while Luke traces his line back to Adam. The Hebrew and Aramaic often used the word son (\bn\) for the quality or character, but here the idea is descent. Christians are called sons of God because Christ has bestowed this dignity upon us (Romans:8:14; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@Galatians:3:26; strkjv@4:5-7|). Verse 1 is the description of the list in verses 2-17|. The names are given in three groups, Abraham to David (2-6|), David to Babylon Removal (6-11|), Jechoniah to Jesus (12-16|). The removal to Babylon (\metoikesias Babulnos\) occurs at the end of verse 11|, the beginning of verse 12|, and twice in the resume in verse 17|. This great event is used to mark off the two last divisions from each other. It is a good illustration of the genitive as the case of genus or kind. The Babylon removal could mean either to Babylon or from Babylon or, indeed, the removal of Babylon. But the readers would know the facts from the Old Testament, the removal of the Jews to Babylon. Then verse 17| makes a summary of the three lists, fourteen in each by counting David twice and omitting several, a sort of mnemonic device that is common enough. Matthew does not mean to say that there were only fourteen in actual genealogy. The names of the women (Thamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba the wife of Uriah) are likewise not counted. But it is a most interesting list.
rwp@Matthew:1:21 @{Thou shalt call his name Jesus} (\Kalesies to onoma autou Isoun\). The rabbis named six whose names were given before birth: "Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and the name of the Messiah, whom may the Holy One, blessed be His name, bring in our day." The angel puts it up to Joseph as the putative father to name the child. "Jesus is the same as Joshua, a contraction of Jehoshuah (Numbers:13:16; strkjv@1Chronicles:7:27|), signifying in Hebrew, 'Jehovah is helper,' or 'Help of Jehovah'" (Broadus). Songs:Jesus is the Greek form of Joshua (Hebrews:4:8|). He is another Joshua to lead the true people of God into the Promised Land. The name itself was common enough as Josephus shows. Jehovah is Salvation as seen in Joshua for the Hebrews and in Jesus for all believers. "The meaning of the name, therefore, finds expression in the title _Saviour_ applied to our Lord (Luke:1:47; strkjv@2:11; strkjv@John:4:42|)" (Vincent). He will save (\ssei\) his people from their sins and so be their Saviour (\Str\). He will be prophet, priest, and king, but "Saviour" sums it all up in one word. The explanation is carried out in the promise, "for he is the one who (\autos\) will save (\ssei\ with a play on the name Jesus) his people from their sins." Paul will later explain that by the covenant people, the children of promise, God means the spiritual Israel, all who believe whether Jews or Gentiles. This wonderful word touches the very heart of the mission and message of the Messiah. Jesus himself will show that the kingdom of heaven includes all those and only those who have the reign of God in their hearts and lives. {From their sins} (\apo tn hamartin autn\). Both sins of omission and of commission. The substantive (\hamartia\) is from the verb (\hamartanein\) and means missing the mark as with an arrow. How often the best of us fall short and fail to score. Jesus will save us away from (\apo\) as well as out of (\ex\) our sins. They will be cast into oblivion and he will cover them up out of sight.
rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{Now when Jesus was born} (\tou de Isou gennthentos\). The fact of the birth of Jesus is stated by the genitive absolute construction (first aorist passive participle of the same verb \genna\ used twice already of the birth of Jesus, strkjv@1:16,20|, and used in the genealogy, strkjv@1:2-16|). Matthew does not propose to give biographic details of the supernatural birth of Jesus, wonderful as it was and disbelieved as it is by some today who actually deny that Jesus was born at all or ever lived, men who talk of the Jesus Myth, the Christ Myth, etc. "The main purpose is to show the reception given by the world to the new-born Messianic King. Homage from afar, hostility at home; foreshadowing the fortunes of the new faith: reception by the Gentiles, rejection by the Jews" (Bruce).
rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{In Bethlehem of Judea} (\en Bthleem ts Ioudaias\). There was a Bethlehem in Galilee seven miles northwest of Nazareth (Josephus, _Antiquities_ XIX. 15). This Bethlehem (house of bread, the name means) of Judah was the scene of Ruth's life with Boaz (Ruth:1:1f.; Mt. strkjv@1:5|) and the home of David, descendant of Ruth and ancestor of Jesus (Mt. strkjv@1:5|). David was born here and anointed king by Samuel (1Samuel:17:12|). The town came to be called the city of David (Luke:2:11|). Jesus, who was born in this House of Bread called himself the Bread of Life (John:6:35|), the true Manna from heaven. Matthew assumes the knowledge of the details of the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem which are given in strkjv@Luke:2:1-7| or did not consider them germane to his purpose. Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem from Nazareth because it was the original family home for both of them. The first enrolment by the Emperor Augustus as the papyri show was by families (\kat' oikian\). Possibly Joseph had delayed the journey for some reason till now it approached the time for the birth of the child.
rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{In the days of Herod the King} (\en hmerais Hridou tou Basiles\). This is the only date for the birth of Christ given by Matthew. Luke gives a more precise date in his Gospel (Luke:2:1-3|), the time of the first enrolment by Augustus and while Cyrenius was ruler of Syria. More will be said of Luke's date when we come to his Gospel. We know from Matthew that Jesus was born while Herod was king, the Herod sometimes called Herod the Great. Josephus makes it plain that Herod died B.C. 4. He was first Governor of Galilee, but had been king of Judaea since B.C. 40 (by Antony and Octavius). I call him "Herod the Great Pervert" in _Some Minor Characters in the New Testament_. He was great in sin and in cruelty and had won the favour of the Emperor. The story in Josephus is a tragedy. It is not made plain by Matthew how long before the death of Herod Jesus was born. Our traditional date A.D. 1, is certainly wrong as Matthew shows. It seems plain that the birth of Jesus cannot be put later than B.C. 5. The data supplied by Luke probably call for B.C. 6 or 7.
rwp@Matthew:2:4 @{He inquired of them where the Christ should be born} (\epunthaneto par' autn pou ho Christos genntai\). The prophetic present (\genntai\) is given, the very words of Herod retained by Matthew's report. The imperfect tense (epunthaneto) suggests that Herod inquired repeatedly, probably of one and another of the leaders gathered together, both Sadducees (chief priests) and Pharisees (scribes). McNeile doubts, like Holtzmann, if Herod actually called together all the Sanhedrin and probably "he could easily ask the question of a single scribe," because he had begun his reign with a massacre of the Sanhedrin (Josephus, _Ant_. XIV. ix. 4). But that was thirty years ago and Herod was desperately in earnest to learn what the Jews really expected about the coming of "the Messiah." Still Herod probably got together not the Sanhedrin since "elders" are not mentioned, but leaders among the chief priests and scribes, not a formal meeting but a free assembly for conference. He had evidently heard of this expected king and he would swallow plenty of pride to be able to compass the defeat of these hopes.
rwp@Matthew:3:1 @{And in those days cometh John the Baptist} (\en de tais hmerais paraginetai Ians ho Baptists\). Here the synoptic narrative begins with the baptism of John (Mt. strkjv@3:1; strkjv@Mark:1:2; strkjv@Luke:3:1|) as given by Peter in strkjv@Acts:1:22|, "from the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received up from us" (cf. also strkjv@Acts:10:37-43|, Peter's summary to Cornelius very much like the outline of Mark's Gospel). Matthew does not indicate the date when John appeared as Luke does in ch. 3 (the fifteenth year of Tiberius's reign). It was some thirty years after the birth of John, precisely how long after the return of Joseph and Mary to Nazareth we do not know. Moffatt translates the verb (\paraginetai\) "came on the scene," but it is the historical present and calls for a vivid imagination on the part of the reader. There he is as he comes forward, makes his appearance. His name John means "Gift of Jehovah" (cf. German _Gotthold_) and is a shortened form of Johanan. He is described as "the Baptist," "the Baptizer" for that is the rite that distinguishes him. The Jews probably had proselyte baptism as I. Abrahams shows (_Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels_, p. 37). But this rite was meant for the Gentiles who accepted Judaism. John is treating the Jews as Gentiles in demanding baptism at their hands on the basis of repentance.
rwp@Matthew:3:14 @{Would have hindered} (\diekluen\). Rather "tried to prevent" as Moffatt has it. It is the conative imperfect. The two men of destiny are face to face for the first time apparently. The Coming One stands before John and he recognizes him before the promised sign is given.
rwp@Matthew:4:12 @{Now when he heard} (\akousas de\). The reason for Christ's return to Galilee is given here to be that John had been delivered up into prison. The Synoptic Gospels skip from the temptation of Jesus to the Galilean ministry, a whole year. But for strkjv@John:1:19-3:36| we should know nothing of the "year of obscurity" (Stalker). John supplies items to help fill in the picture. Christ's work in Galilee began after the close of the active ministry of the Baptist who lingered on in prison for a year or more.
rwp@Matthew:5:3 @{Blessed} (\makarioi\). The English word "blessed" is more exactly represented by the Greek verbal \eulogtoi\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:68| of God by Zacharias, or the perfect passive participle \eulogmenos\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:42| of Mary by Elizabeth and in strkjv@Matthew:21:9|. Both forms come from \euloge\, to speak well of (\eu, logos\). The Greek word here (\makarioi\) is an adjective that means "happy" which in English etymology goes back to hap, chance, good-luck as seen in our words haply, hapless, happily, happiness. "Blessedness is, of course, an infinitely higher and better thing than mere happiness" (Weymouth). English has thus ennobled "blessed" to a higher rank than "happy." But "happy" is what Jesus said and the _Braid Scots New Testament_ dares to say "Happy" each time here as does the _Improved Edition of the American Bible Union Version_. The Greek word is as old as Homer and Pindar and was used of the Greek gods and also of men, but largely of outward prosperity. Then it is applied to the dead who died in the Lord as in strkjv@Revelation:14:13|. Already in the Old Testament the Septuagint uses it of moral quality. "Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love" (Vincent). Jesus takes this word "happy" and puts it in this rich environment. "This is one of the words which have been transformed and ennobled by New Testament use; by association, as in the Beatitudes, with unusual conditions, accounted by the world miserable, or with rare and difficult" (Bruce). It is a pity that we have not kept the word "happy" to the high and holy plane where Jesus placed it. "If you know these things, happy (\makarioi\) are you if you do them" (John:13:17|). "Happy (\makarioi\) are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John:20:29|). And Paul applies this adjective to God, "according to the gospel of the glory of the happy (\makariou\) God" (1Timothy:1:11|. Cf. also strkjv@Titus:2:13|). The term "Beatitudes" (Latin _beatus_) comes close to the meaning of Christ here by \makarioi\. It will repay one to make a careful study of all the "beatitudes" in the New Testament where this word is employed. It occurs nine times here (3-11|), though the beatitudes in verses 10 and 11 are very much alike. The copula is not expressed in either of these nine beatitudes. In each case a reason is given for the beatitude, "for" (\hoti\), that shows the spiritual quality involved. Some of the phrases employed by Jesus here occur in the Psalms, some even in the Talmud (itself later than the New Testament, though of separate origin). That is of small moment. "The originality of Jesus lies in putting the due value on these thoughts, collecting them, and making them as prominent as the Ten Commandments. No greater service can be rendered to mankind than to rescue from obscurity neglected moral commonplaces " (Bruce). Jesus repeated his sayings many times as all great teachers and preachers do, but this sermon has unity, progress, and consummation. It does not contain all that Jesus taught by any means, but it stands out as the greatest single sermon of all time, in its penetration, pungency, and power. {The poor in spirit} (\hoi ptchoi ti pneumati\). Luke has only "the poor," but he means the same by it as this form in Matthew, "the pious in Israel, for the most part poor, whom the worldly rich despised and persecuted" (McNeile). The word used here (\ptchoi\) is applied to the beggar Lazarus in strkjv@Luke:16:20,22| and suggests spiritual destitution (from \ptss\ to crouch, to cower). The other word \pens\ is from \penomai\, to work for one's daily bread and so means one who works for his living. The word \ptchos\ is more frequent in the New Testament and implies deeper poverty than \pens\. "The kingdom of heaven" here means the reign of God in the heart and life. This is the _summum bonum_ and is what matters most.
rwp@Matthew:5:48 @{Perfect} (\teleioi\). The word comes from \telos\, end, goal, limit. Here it is the goal set before us, the absolute standard of our Heavenly Father. The word is used also for relative perfection as of adults compared with children. strkjv@Matthew:6:1 @{Take heed} (\prosechete\). The Greek idiom includes "mind" (\noun\) which is often expressed in ancient Greek and once in the Septuagint (Job:7:17|). In the New Testament the substantive \nous\ is understood. It means to "hold the mind on a matter," take pains, take heed. "Righteousness" (\dikaiosunn\) is the correct text in this verse. Three specimens of the Pharisaic "righteousness" are given (alms, prayer, fasting). {To be seen} (\theathnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of purpose. Our word _theatrical_ is this very word, spectacular performance. {With your Father} (\para ti patri humn\). Literally "beside your Father," standing by his side, as he looks at it.
rwp@Matthew:6:9 @{After this manner therefore pray ye} (\houts oun proseuchesthe humeis\). "You" expressed in contrast with "the Gentiles." It should be called "The Model Prayer" rather than "The Lord's Prayer." "Thus" pray as he gives them a model. He himself did not use it as a liturgy (cf. strkjv@John:17|). There is no evidence that Jesus meant it for liturgical use by others. In strkjv@Luke:11:2-4| practically the same prayer though briefer is given at a later time by Jesus to the apostles in response to a request that he teach them how to pray. McNeile argues that the form in Luke is the original to which Matthew has made additions: "The tendency of liturgical formulas is towards enrichment rather than abbreviation." But there is no evidence whatever that Jesus designed it as a set formula. There is no real harm in a liturgical formula if one likes it, but no one sticks to just one formula in prayer. There is good and not harm in children learning and saying this noble prayer. Some people are disturbed over the words "Our Father" and say that no one has a right to call God Father who has not been "born again." But that is to say that an unconverted sinner cannot pray until he is converted, an absurd contradiction. God is the Father of all men in one sense; the recognition of Him as the Father in the full sense is the first step in coming back to him in regeneration and conversion.
rwp@Matthew:6:11 @{Our daily bread} (\ton arton hmn ton epiousion\). This adjective "daily" (\epiousion\) coming after "Give us this day" (\dos hmn smeron\) has given expositors a great deal of trouble. The effort has been made to derive it from \epi\ and \n\ (\ousa\). It clearly comes from \epi\ and \in\ (\epi\ and \eimi\) like \ti epiousi\ ("on the coming day," "the next day," strkjv@Acts:16:12|). But the adjective \epiousios\ is rare and Origen said it was made by the Evangelists Matthew and Luke to reproduce the idea of an Aramaic original. Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_ say: "The papyri have as yet shed no clear light upon this difficult word (Matthew:6:11; strkjv@Luke:11:3|), which was in all probability a new coinage by the author of the Greek Q to render his Aramaic Original" (this in 1919). Deissmann claims that only about fifty purely New Testament or "Christian" words can be admitted out of the more than 5,000 used. "But when a word is not recognizable at sight as a Jewish or Christian new formation, we must consider it as an ordinary Greek word until the contrary is proved. \Epiousios\ has all the appearance of a word that originated in trade and traffic of the everyday life of the people (cf. my hints in _Neutestamentliche Studien Georg Heinrici dargebracht_, Leipzig, 1914, pp. 118f.). The opinion here expressed has been confirmed by A. Debrunner's discovery (_Theol. Lit. Ztg_. 1925, Col. 119) of \epiousios\ in an ancient housekeeping book" (_Light from the Ancient East_, New ed. 1927, p. 78 and note 1). Songs:then it is not a word coined by the Evangelist or by Q to express an Aramaic original. The word occurs also in three late MSS. after 2Macc. strkjv@1:8, \tous epiousious\ after \tous artous\. The meaning, in view of the kindred participle (\epiousi\) in strkjv@Acts:16:12|, seems to be "for the coming day," a daily prayer for the needs of the next day as every housekeeper understands like the housekeeping book discovered by Debrunner.
rwp@Matthew:6:12 @{Our debts} (\ta opheilmata hmn\). Luke (Luke:11:4|) has "sins" (\hamartias\). In the ancient Greek \opheilma\ is common for actual legal debts as in strkjv@Romans:4:4|, but here it is used of moral and spiritual debts to God. "Trespasses" is a mistranslation made common by the Church of England Prayer Book. It is correct in verse 14| in Christ's argument about prayer, but it is not in the Model Prayer itself. See strkjv@Matthew:18:28,30| for sin pictured again by Christ "as debt and the sinner as a debtor" (Vincent). We are thus described as having wronged God. The word \opheil\ for moral obligation was once supposed to be peculiar to the New Testament. But it is common in that sense in the papyri (Deismann, _Bible Studies_, p. 221; _Light from the Ancient East,_ New ed., p. 331). We ask forgiveness "in proportion as" (\hs\) we _also_ have forgiven those in debt to us, a most solemn reflection. \Aphkamen\ is one of the three k aorists (\ethka, edka, hka\). It means to send away, to dismiss, to wipe off.
rwp@Matthew:6:13 @The Doxology is placed in the margin of the Revised Version. It is wanting in the oldest and best Greek manuscripts. The earliest forms vary very much, some shorter, some longer than the one in the Authorized Version. The use of a doxology arose when this prayer began to be used as a liturgy to be recited or to be chanted in public worship. It was not an original part of the Model Prayer as given by Jesus.
rwp@Matthew:9:2 @{They brought} (\prosepheron\). Imperfect, "were bringing," graphic picture made very vivid by the details in strkjv@Mark:2:1-4| and strkjv@Luke:5:17|. "{Lying on a bed}" (stretched on a couch), perfect passive participle, a little bed or couch (\klinidion\) in strkjv@Luke:5:19|, "a pallet" (\krabatos\) in strkjv@Mark:2:4,9,11|. {Thy sins are forgiven} (\aphientai\). Present passive indicative (aoristic present). Luke (Luke:5:21|) has \aphentai\, Doric and Ionic perfect passive indicative for the Attic \apheintai\, one of the dialectical forms appearing in the _Koin_.
rwp@Matthew:9:6 @{That ye may know} (\hina eidte\). Jesus accepts the challenge in the thoughts of the scribes and performs the miracle of healing the paralytic, who so far only had his sins forgiven, to prove his Messianic power on earth to forgive sins even as God does. The word \exousia\ may mean either power or authority. He had both as a matter of fact. Note same word in strkjv@9:8|. {Then saith he to the sick of the palsy} (\tote legei ti paralutiki\). These words of course, were not spoken by Jesus. Curiously enough Matthew interjects them right in the midst of the sayings of Jesus in reply to the scorn of the scribes. Still more remarkable is the fact that Mark (Mark:2:10|) has precisely the same words in the same place save that Matthew has added \tote\, of which he is fond, to what Mark already had. Mark, as we know, largely reports Peter's words and sees with Peter's eyes. Luke has the same idea in the same place without the vivid historical present \legei (eipen ti paralelumeni)\ with the participle in place of the adjective. This is one of the many proofs that both Matthew and Luke made use of Mark's Gospel each in his own way. {Take up thy bed} (\ron sou tn klinn\). Pack up at once (aorist active imperative) the rolled-up pallet.
rwp@Matthew:10:2 @{The names of the twelve apostles} (\tn ddeka apostoln ta onomata\). This is the official name (missionaries) used here by Matthew for the first time. The names are given here, but Matthew does not say that they were chosen at this time. Mark (Mark:3:13-19|) and Luke (Luke:6:12-16|) state that Jesus "chose" them, "appointed" them after a night of prayer in the mountain and came down with them and then delivered the Sermon (Luke:6:17|). Simon heads the list (\prtos\) in all four lists including strkjv@Acts:1:13f|. He came to be first and foremost at the great Pentecost (Acts:2| and strkjv@Acts:3|). The apostles disputed a number of times as to which was greatest. Judas Iscariot comes last each time save that he is absent in Acts, being already dead. Matthew calls him the betrayer (\ho paradidous\). Iscariot is usually explained as "man of Kerioth" down near Edom (Joshua:15:25|). Philip comes fifth and James the son of Alphaeus the ninth. Bartholomew is the name for Nathanael. Thaddaeus is Judas the brother of James. Simon Zelotes is also called Simon the Canaanean (Zealous, Hebrew word). This is apparently their first preaching and healing tour without Jesus. He sends them forth by twos (Mark:6:7|). Matthew names them in pairs, probably as they were sent out.
rwp@Matthew:10:25 @{Beelzebub} (\beezeboul\ according to B, \beelzeboul\ by most Greek MSS., \beelzeboub\ by many non-Greek MSS.). The etymology of the word is also unknown, whether "lord of a dwelling" with a pun on "the master of the house" (\oikodespotn\) or "lord of flies" or "lord of dung" or "lord of idolatrous sacrifices." It is evidently a term of reproach. "An opprobrious epithet; exact form of the word and meaning of the name have given more trouble to commentators than it is all worth" (Bruce). See strkjv@Matthew:12:24|.
rwp@Matthew:11:17 @{Children sitting in the market places} (\paidiois kathmenois en tais agorais\). This parable of the children playing in the market place is given also in strkjv@Luke:7:31f|. Had Jesus as a child in Nazareth not played games with the children? He had certainly watched them often since. The interest of Christ in children was keen. He has really created the modern child's world out of the indifference of the past. They would not play wedding or funeral in a peevish fret. These metaphors in the Gospels are vivid to those with eyes to see. The \agora\ was originally the assembly, then the forum or public square where the people gathered for trade or for talk as in Athens (Acts:17:17|) and in many modern towns. Songs:the Roman Forum. The oriental bazaars today are held in streets rather than public squares. Even today with all the automobiles children play in the streets. In English the word "cheap" (Cheapside) meant only barter and price, not cheap in our sense. The word for mourn (\ekopsasthe\) means to beat the heart, direct middle, after the fashion of eastern funeral lamentations.
rwp@Matthew:12:31 @{But the blasphemy against the Spirit} (\h de tou pneumatos blasphmia\). Objective genitive. This is the unpardonable sin. In 32| we have \kata tou pneumatos tou hagiou\ to make it plainer. What is the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? These Pharisees had already committed it. They had attributed the works of the Holy Spirit by whose power Jesus wrought his miracles (12:28|) to the devil. That sin was without excuse and would not be forgiven in their age or in the coming one (12:32|). People often ask if they can commit the unpardonable sin. Probably some do who ridicule the manifest work of God's Spirit in men's lives and attribute the Spirit's work to the devil.
rwp@Matthew:13:8 @{Yielded fruit} (\edidou karpon\). Change to imperfect tense of \didmi\, to give, for it was continuous fruit-bearing. {Some a hundredfold} (\ho men hekaton\). Variety, but fruit. This is the only kind that is worth while. The hundredfold is not an exaggeration (cf. strkjv@Genesis:26:12|). Such instances are given by Wetstein for Greece, Italy, and Africa. Herodotus (i. 93) says that in Babylonia grain yielded two hundredfold and even to three hundredfold. This, of course, was due to irrigation as in the Nile Valley.
rwp@Matthew:13:18 @{Hear then ye the parable} (\humeis oun akousate tn paraboln\). Jesus has given in strkjv@13:13| one reason for his use of parables, the condemnation which the Pharisees have brought on themselves by their spiritual dulness: "Therefore I speak to them in parables" (\dia touto en parablais antois lal\). He can go on preaching the mysteries of the kingdom without their comprehending what he is saying, but he is anxious that the disciples really get personal knowledge (\gnnai\, verse 11|) of these same mysteries. Songs:he explains in detail what he means to teach by the Parable of the Sower. He appeals to them (note position of \hmeis\) to listen as he explains.
rwp@Matthew:13:23 @{Verily beareth fruit} (\d karpophorei\). Who in reality (\d\) does bear fruit (cf. strkjv@Matthew:7:16-20|). The fruit reveals the character of the tree and the value of the straw for wheat. Some grain must come else it is only chaff, straw, worthless. The first three classes have no fruit and so show that they are unfruitful soil, unsaved souls and lives. There is variety in those who do bear fruit, but they have some fruit. The lesson of the parable as explained by Jesus is precisely this, the variety in the results of the seed sown according to the soil on which it falls. Every teacher and preacher knows how true this is. It is the teacher's task as the sower to sow the right seed, the word of the kingdom. The soil determines the outcome. There are critics today who scout this interpretation of the parable by Jesus as too allegorical with too much detail and probably not that really given by Jesus since modern scholars are not agreed on the main point of the parable. But the average Christian sees the point all right. This parable was not meant to explain all the problems of human life.
rwp@Matthew:13:24 @{Set he before them} (\parethken\). Songs:again in strkjv@13:31|. He placed another parable beside (\para\) the one already given and explained. The same verb (\paratheinai\) occurs in strkjv@Luke:9:16|. {Is likened} (\hmoith\). Timeless aorist passive and a common way of introducing these parables of the kingdom where a comparison is drawn (18:23; strkjv@22:2; strkjv@25:1|). The case of \anthrpi\ is associative instrumental.
rwp@Matthew:13:54 @{Is not this the carpenter's son?} (\ouch houtos estin ho tou tektnos huios?\). The well-known, the leading, or even for a time the only carpenter in Nazareth till Jesus took the place of Joseph as the carpenter. What the people of Nazareth could not comprehend was how one with the origin and environment of Jesus here in Nazareth could possess the wisdom which he appeared to have in his teaching (\edidasken\). That has often puzzled people how a boy whom they knew could become the man he apparently is after leaving them. They knew Joseph, Mary, the brothers (four of them named) and sisters (names not given). Jesus passed here as the son of Joseph and these were younger brothers and sisters (half brothers and sisters technically).
rwp@Matthew:14:12 @{And they went and told Jesus} (\kai elthontes apggeilan ti Isou\). As was meet after they had given his body decent burial. It was a shock to the Master who alone knew how great John really was. The fate of John was a prophecy of what was before Jesus. According to strkjv@Matthew:14:13| the news of the fate of John led to the withdrawal of Jesus to the desert privately, an additional motive besides the need for rest after the strain of the recent tour.
rwp@Matthew:14:22 @{Constrained} (\nagkasen\). Literally, "compelled" or "forced." See this word also in strkjv@Luke:14:23|. The explanation for this strong word in strkjv@Mark:6:45| and strkjv@Matthew:14:22| is given in strkjv@John:6:15|. It is the excited purpose of the crowd to take Jesus by force and to make him national king. This would be political revolution and would defeat all the plans of Jesus about his kingdom. Things have reached a climax. The disciples were evidently swept off their feet by the mob psychology for they still shared the Pharisaic hope of a political kingdom. With the disciples out of the way Jesus could handle the crowd more easily, {till he should send the multitudes away} (\hes hou apolusi tous ochlous\). The use of the aorist subjunctive with \hes\ or \hes hou\ is a neat and common Greek idiom where the purpose is not yet realized. Songs:in strkjv@18:30; strkjv@26:36|. "While" sometimes renders it well. The subjunctive is retained after a past tense instead of the change to the optative of the ancient Attic. The optative is very rare anyhow, but Luke uses it with \prin \ in strkjv@Acts:25:16|.
rwp@Matthew:15:17 @{Perceive ye not?} (\ou noeite\). Christ expects us to make use of our \nous\, intellect, not for pride, but for insight. The mind does not work infallibly, but we should use it for its God-given purpose. Intellectual laziness or flabbiness is no credit to a devout soul.
rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{And I also say unto thee} (\k'ag de soi leg\). "The emphasis is not on 'Thou art Peter' over against 'Thou art the Christ,' but on \Kag\: 'The Father hath revealed to thee one truth, and I also tell you another" (McNeile). Jesus calls Peter here by the name that he had said he would have (John:1:42|). Peter (\Petros\) is simply the Greek word for Cephas (Aramaic). Then it was prophecy, now it is fact. In verse 17| Jesus addresses him as "Simon Bar-Jonah," his full patronymic (Aramaic) name. But Jesus has a purpose now in using his nickname "Peter" which he had himself given him. Jesus makes a remarkable play on Peter's name, a pun in fact, that has caused volumes of controversy and endless theological strife. {On this rock} (\epi tauti ti petri\) Jesus says, a ledge or cliff of rock like that in strkjv@7:24| on which the wise man built his house. \Petros\ is usually a smaller detachment of the massive ledge. But too much must not be made of this point since Jesus probably spoke Aramaic to Peter which draws no such distinction (\Kph\). What did Jesus mean by this word-play?
rwp@Matthew:16:19 @{The Keys of the kingdom} (\tas kleidas ts basileias\). Here again we have the figure of a building with keys to open from the outside. The question is raised at once if Jesus does not here mean the same thing by "kingdom" that he did by "church" in verse 18|. In strkjv@Revelation:1:18; strkjv@3:7| Christ the Risen Lord has "the keys of death and of Hades." He has also "the keys of the kingdom of heaven" which he here hands over to Peter as "gatekeeper" or "steward" (\oikonomos\) provided we do not understand it as a special and peculiar prerogative belonging to Peter. The same power here given to Peter belongs to every disciple of Jesus in all the ages. Advocates of papal supremacy insist on the primacy of Peter here and the power of Peter to pass on this supposed sovereignty to others. But this is all quite beside the mark. We shall soon see the disciples actually disputing again (Matthew:18:1|) as to which of them is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven as they will again (20:21|) and even on the night before Christ's death. Clearly neither Peter nor the rest understood Jesus to say here that Peter was to have supreme authority. What is added shows that Peter held the keys precisely as every preacher and teacher does. To "bind" (\dsis\) in rabbinical language is to forbid, to "loose" (\lusis\) is to permit. Peter would be like a rabbi who passes on many points. Rabbis of the school of Hillel "loosed" many things that the school of Schammai "bound." The teaching of Jesus is the standard for Peter and for all preachers of Christ. Note the future perfect indicative (\estai dedemenon, estai lelumenon\), a state of completion. All this assumes, of course, that Peter's use of the keys will be in accord with the teaching and mind of Christ. The binding and loosing is repeated by Jesus to all the disciples (18:18|). Later after the Resurrection Christ will use this same language to all the disciples (John:20:23|), showing that it was not a special prerogative of Peter. He is simply first among equals, _primus inter pares_, because on this occasion he was spokesman for the faith of all. It is a violent leap in logic to claim power to forgive sins, to pronounce absolution, by reason of the technical rabbinical language that Jesus employed about binding and loosing. Every preacher uses the keys of the kingdom when he proclaims the terms of salvation in Christ. The proclamation of these terms when accepted by faith in Christ has the sanction and approval of God the Father. The more personal we make these great words the nearer we come to the mind of Christ. The more ecclesiastical we make them the further we drift away from him.
rwp@Matthew:16:22 @{Peter took him} (\proslabomenos auton ho Petros\). Middle voice, "taking to himself," aside and apart, "as if by a right of his own. He acted with greater familiarity after the token of acknowledgment had been given. Jesus, however, reduces him to his level" (Bengel). "Peter here appears in a new character; a minute ago speaking under inspiration from heaven, now under inspiration from the opposite quarter" (Bruce). Syriac Sinaitic for strkjv@Mark:8:32| has it "as though pitying him." But this exclamation and remonstrance of Peter was soon interrupted by Jesus. {God have mercy on thee} (\hiles\. Supply \ei\ or \est ho theos\). {This shall never be} (\ou m estai soi touto\). Strongest kind of negation, as if Peter would not let it happen. Peter had perfect assurance.
rwp@Matthew:16:23 @{But he turned} (\ho de strapheis\). Second aorist passive participle, quick ingressive action, away from Peter in revulsion, and toward the other disciples (Mark:8:33| has \epistrapheis\ and \idn tous mathtas autou\). {Get thee behind me, Satan} (\Hupage opis mou, Satan\). Just before Peter played the part of a rock in the noble confession and was given a place of leadership. Now he is playing the part of Satan and is ordered to the rear. Peter was tempting Jesus not to go on to the cross as Satan had done in the wilderness. "None are more formidable instruments of temptation than well-meaning friends, who care more for our comfort than for our character" (Bruce). "In Peter the banished Satan had once more returned" (Plummer). {A stumbling-block unto me} (\skandalon ei emou\). Objective genitive. Peter was acting as Satan's catspaw, in ignorance, surely, but none the less really. He had set a trap for Christ that would undo all his mission to earth. "Thou art not, as before, a noble block, lying in its right position as a massive foundation stone. On the contrary, thou art like a stone quite out of its proper place, and lying right across the road in which I must go--lying as a stone of stumbling" (Morison). {Thou mindest not} (\ou phroneis\). "Your outlook is not God's, but man's" (Moffatt). You do not think God's thoughts. Clearly the consciousness of the coming cross is not a new idea with Jesus. We do not know when he first foresaw this outcome any more than we know when first the Messianic consciousness appeared in Jesus. He had the glimmerings of it as a boy of twelve, when he spoke of "My Father's house." He knows now that he must die on the cross.
rwp@Matthew:18:21 @{Until seven times?} (\hes heptakis?\) Peter thought that he was generous as the Jewish rule was three times (Amos:1:6|). His question goes back to verse 15|. "Against me" is genuine here. "The man who asks such a question does not really know what forgiveness means" (Plummer).
rwp@Matthew:18:22 @{Until seventy times seven} (\hes hebdomkontakis hepta\). It is not clear whether this idiom means seventy-seven or as the Revised Version has it (490 times). If \heptakis\ were written it would clearly be 490 times. The same ambiguity is seen in strkjv@Genesis:4:24|, the LXX text by omitting \kai\. In the _Test. of the Twelve Patriarchs, Benj._ vii. 4, it is used in the sense of seventy times seven. But it really makes little difference because Jesus clearly means unlimited forgiveness in either case. "The unlimited revenge of primitive man has given place to the unlimited forgiveness of Christians" (McNeile).
rwp@Matthew:19:9 @{Except for fornication} (\parektos logou porneias\). This is the marginal reading in Westcott and Hort which also adds "maketh her an adulteress" (\poiei autn moicheuthnai\) and also these words: "and he that marrieth her when she is put away committeth adultery" (\kai ho apolelumenn gamsas moichatai\). There seems to be a certain amount of assimilation in various manuscripts between this verse and the words in strkjv@5:32|. But, whatever reading is accepted here, even the short one in Westcott and Hort (\m epi porneii\, not for fornication), it is plain that Matthew represents Jesus in both places as allowing divorce for fornication as a general term (\porneia\) which is technically adultery (\moicheia\ from \moicha or moicheu\). Here, as in strkjv@5:31f.|, a group of scholars deny the genuineness of the exception given by Matthew alone. McNeile holds that "the addition of the saving clause is, in fact, opposed to the spirit of the whole context, and must have been made at a time when the practice of divorce for adultery had already grown up." That in my opinion is gratuitous criticism which is unwilling to accept Matthew's report because it disagrees with one's views on the subject of divorce. He adds: "It cannot be supposed that Matthew wished to represent Jesus as siding with the school of Shammai." Why not, if Shammai on this point agreed with Jesus? Those who deny Matthew's report are those who are opposed to remarriage at all. Jesus by implication, as in strkjv@5:31|, does allow remarriage of the innocent party, but not of the guilty one. Certainly Jesus has lifted the whole subject of marriage and divorce to a new level, far beyond the petty contentions of the schools of Hillel and Shammai.
rwp@Matthew:19:11 @{But they to whom it is given} (\all' hois dedotai\). A neat Greek idiom, dative case of relation and perfect passive indicative. The same idea is repeated at the close of verse 12|. It is a voluntary renunciation of marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. "Jesus recognizes the severity of the demand as going beyond the capacity of all but a select number." It was a direct appeal to the spiritual intelligence of the disciples not to misconceive his meaning as certainly the monastic orders have done.
rwp@Matthew:21:33 @{A hedge} (\phragmon\). Or fence as a protection against wild beasts. {Digged a winepress} (\ruxen lnon\). Out of the solid rock to hold the grapes and wine as they were crushed. Such wine-vats are to be seen today in Palestine. {Built a tower} (\ikodomsen purgon\). This for the vinedressers and watchmen (2Chronicles:26:10|). Utmost care was thus taken. Note "a booth in a vineyard" (Isaiah:1:8|). See also strkjv@Isaiah:24:20; strkjv@Job:27:18|. Let it out (\exedeto, exedoto\ the usual form). For hire, the terms not being given. The lease allowed three forms, money-rent, a proportion of the crop, or a definite amount of the produce whether it was a good or bad year. Probably the last form is that contemplated here.
rwp@Matthew:22:1 @{Again in parables} (\palin en parabolais\). Matthew has already given two on this occasion (The Two Sons, The Wicked Husbandmen). He alone gives this Parable of the Marriage Feast of the King's Son. It is somewhat similar to that of The Supper in strkjv@Luke:14:16-23| given on another occasion. Hence some scholars consider this merely Matthew's version of the Lucan parable in the wrong place because of Matthew's habit of grouping the sayings of Jesus. But that is a gratuitous indictment of Matthew's report which definitely locates the parable here by \palin\. Some regard it as not spoken by Jesus at all, but an effort on the part of the writer to cover the sin and fate of the Jews, the calling of the Gentiles, and God's demand for righteousness. But here again it is like Jesus and suits the present occasion.
rwp@Matthew:22:3 @{To call them that were bidden} (\kalesai tous keklmenous\). "Perhaps an unconscious play on the words, lost in both A.V. and Rev., {to call the called}" (Vincent). It was a Jewish custom to invite a second time the already invited (Esther:5:8; strkjv@6:14|). The prophets of old had given God's invitation to the Jewish people. Now the Baptist and Jesus had given the second invitation that the feast was ready. {And they would not come} (\kai ouk thelon elthein\). This negative imperfect characterizes the stubborn refusal of the Jewish leaders to accept Jesus as God's Son (John:1:11|). This is "The Hebrew Tragedy" (Conder).
rwp@Matthew:23:12 @{Exalt himself} (\hupssei heauton\). Somewhat like strkjv@18:4; strkjv@20:26|. Given by Luke in other contexts (14:11; strkjv@18:14|). Characteristic of Christ.
rwp@Matthew:24:14 @{Shall be preached} (\keruchthsetai\). Heralded in all the inhabited world. \En holi ti oikoumeni\ supply \gi\. It is not here said that all will be saved nor must this language be given too literal and detailed an application to every individual.
rwp@Matthew:26:28 @{The Covenant} (\ts diathks\). The adjective \kains\ in Textus Receptus is not genuine. The covenant is an agreement or contract between two (\dia, duo, thke\, from \tithmi\). It is used also for will (Latin, _testamentum_) which becomes operative at death (Hebrews:9:15-17|). Hence our _New Testament_. Either covenant or will makes sense here. Covenant is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:7:22; strkjv@8:8| and often. In the Hebrew to make a covenant was to cut up the sacrifice and so ratify the agreement (Genesis:15:9-18|). Lightfoot argues that the word \diathke\ means covenant in the N.T. except in strkjv@Hebrews:9:15-17|. Jesus here uses the solemn words of strkjv@Exodus:24:8| "the blood of the covenant" at Sinai. "My blood of the covenant" is in contrast with that. This is the New Covenant of strkjv@Jeremiah:31; strkjv@Hebrews:8|. {Which is shed for many} (\to peri polln ekchunnomenon\). A prophetic present passive participle. The act is symbolized by the ordinance. Cf. the purpose of Christ expressed in strkjv@20:28|. There \anti\ and here \peri\. {Unto remission of sins} (\eis aphesin hamartin\). This clause is in Matthew alone but it is not to be restricted for that reason. It is the truth. This passage answers all the modern sentimentalism that finds in the teaching of Jesus only pious ethical remarks or eschatological dreamings. He had the definite conception of his death on the cross as the basis of forgiveness of sin. The purpose of the shedding of his blood of the New Covenant was precisely to remove (forgive) sins.
rwp@Matthew:26:47 @{While he yet spake} (\eti autou lalountos\). It was an electric moment as Jesus faced Judas with his horde of helpers as if he turned to meet an army. {Let us go} (\agmen\), Jesus had said. And here he is. The eight at the gate seemed to have given no notice. Judas is described here as "one of the twelve" (\heis tn ddeka\) in all three Synoptic Gospels (Mark:14:43; strkjv@Matthew:26:47; strkjv@Luke:22:47|). The very horror of the thing is thus emphasized, that one of the chosen twelve apostles should do this dastardly deed. {A great multitude} (\ochlos polus\). The chief priests and Pharisees had furnished Judas a band of soldiers from the garrison in Antonia (John:18:3|) and the temple police (Luke:22:52|) with swords (knives) and staves (clubs) with a hired rabble who had lanterns also (John:18:3|) in spite of the full moon. Judas was taking no chances of failure for he well knew the strange power of Jesus.
rwp@Matthew:26:48 @{Gave them a sign} (\edken autois smeion\). Probably just before he reached the place, though Mark (Mark:14:44|) has "had given" (\dedkei\) which certainly means before arrival at Gethsemane. At any rate Judas had given the leaders to understand that he would kiss (\phils\) Jesus in order to identify him for certain. The kiss was a common mode of greeting and Judas chose that sign and actually "kissed him fervently" (\katephilsen\, verse 49|), though the compound verb sometimes in the papyri has lost its intensive force. Bruce thinks that Judas was prompted by the inconsistent motives of smouldering love and cowardice. At any rate this revolting ostentatious kiss is "the most terrible instance of the \hekousia philmata echthrou\ (Proverbs:27:6|)," the profuse kisses of an enemy (McNeile). This same compound verb occurs in strkjv@Luke:7:38| of the sinful woman, in strkjv@Luke:15:20| of the Father's embrace of the Prodigal Son, and in strkjv@Acts:20:37| of the Ephesian elders and Paul.
rwp@Matthew:26:51 @{One of them that were with Jesus} (\heis tn meta Isou\). Like the other Synoptics Matthew conceals the name of Peter, probably for prudential reasons as he was still living before A.D. 68. John writing at the end of the century mentions Peter's name (John:18:10|). The sword or knife was one of the two that the disciples had (Luke:22:38|). Bruce suggests that it was a large knife used in connexion with the paschal feast. Evidently Peter aimed to cut off the man's head, not his ear (\tion\ is diminutive in form, but not in sense, as often in the _Koin_). He may have been the leader of the band. His name, Malchus, is also given by John (John:18:10|) because Peter was then dead and in no danger.
rwp@Matthew:26:52 @{Put up again thy sword} (\apostrepson tn machairan sou\). Turn back thy sword into its place. It was a stern rebuke for Peter who had misunderstood the teaching of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:22:38| as well as in strkjv@Matthew:5:39| (cf. strkjv@John:18:36|). The reason given by Jesus has had innumerable illustrations in human history. The sword calls for the sword. Offensive war is here given flat condemnation. The Paris Pact of 1928 (the Kellogg Treaty) is certainly in harmony with the mind of Christ. The will to peace is the first step towards peace, the outlawing of war. Our American cities are often ruled by gangsters who kill each other off.
rwp@Matthew:27:9 @{By Jeremiah the prophet} (\dia Ieremiou\). This quotation comes mainly from ![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}