NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp spoke:
rwp@
1Corinthians:7:10 @{To the married} (\tois gegamkosin\). Perfect active participle of \game\, old verb, to marry, and still married as the tense shows. {I give charge} (\paraggell\). Not mere wish as in verses 7,8|. {Not I, but the Lord} (\ouk eg alla ho kurios\). Paul had no commands from Jesus to the unmarried (men or women), but Jesus had spoken to the married (husbands and wives) as in strkjv@Matthew:5:31f.; strkjv@19:3-12; strkjv@Mark:10:9-12; strkjv@Luke:16:18|. The Master had spoken plain words about divorce. Paul reenforces his own inspired command by the command of Jesus. In strkjv@Mark:10:9| we have from Christ: "What therefore God joined together let not man put asunder" (\m chorizet\). {That the wife depart not from her husband} (\gunaika apo andros m choristhnai\). First aorist passive infinitive (indirect command after \paraggell\) of \choriz\, old verb from adverbial preposition \chris\, separately, apart from, from. Here used of divorce by the wife which, though unusual then, yet did happen as in the case of Salome (sister of Herod the Great) and of Herodias before she married Herod Antipas. Jesus also spoke of it (Mark:10:12|). Now most of the divorces are obtained by women. This passive infinitive is almost reflexive in force according to a constant tendency in the _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 817).
rwp@1Corinthians:7:26 @{I think therefore} (\nomiz oun\). Paul proceeds to express therefore the previously mentioned judgment (\gnmn\) and calls it his opinion, not because he is uncertain, but simply because it is not a command, but advice. {By reason of the present distress} (\dia tn enestsan anagkn\). The participle \enestsan\ is second perfect active of \enistmi\ and means "standing on" or "present" (cf. strkjv@Galatians:1:4; strkjv@Hebrews:9:9|). It occurs in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:2| of the advent of Christ as not "present." Whether Paul has in mind the hoped for second coming of Jesus in this verse we do not certainly know, though probably so. Jesus had spoken of those calamities which would precede his coming (Matthew:24:8ff.|) though Paul had denied saying that the advent was right at hand (2Thessalonians:2:2|). \Anagk\ is a strong word (old and common), either for external circumstances or inward sense of duty. It occurs elsewhere for the woes preceding the second coming (Luke:21:23|) and also for Paul's persecutions (1Thessalonians:3:7; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:4; strkjv@12:10|). Perhaps there is a mingling of both ideas here. {Namely}. This word is not in the Greek. The infinitive of indirect discourse (\huparchein\) after \nomiz\ is repeated with recitative \hoti\, "That the being so is good for a man" (\hoti kalon anthrpi to houts einai\). The use of the article \to\ with \einai\ compels this translation. Probably Paul means for one (\anthrpi\, generic term for man or woman) to remain as he is whether married or unmarried. The copula \estin\ is not expressed. He uses \kalon\ (good) as in strkjv@7:1|.
rwp@1Corinthians:9:27 @{But I buffet my body} (\alla huppiaz mou to sma\). In Aristophanes, Aristotle, Plutarch, from \huppion\, and that from \hupo\ and \ops\ (in papyri), the part of the face under the eyes, a blow in the face, to beat black and blue. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:18:5| which see. Paul does not, like the Gnostics, consider his \sarx\ or his \sma\ sinful and evil. But "it is like the horses in a chariot race, which must be kept well in hand by whip and rein if the prize is to be secured" (Robertson and Plummer). The boxers often used boxing gloves (\cestus\, of ox-hide bands) which gave telling blows. Paul was not willing for his body to be his master. He found good as the outcome of this self-discipline (2Corinthians:12:7; strkjv@Romans:8:13; strkjv@Colossians:2:23; strkjv@3:5|). {And bring it into bondage} (\kai doulagg\). Late compound verb from \doulaggos\, in Diodorus Siculus, Epictetus and substantive in papyri. It is the metaphor of the victor leading the vanquished as captive and slave. {Lest by any means} (\m ps\). Common conjunction for negative purpose with subjunctive as here (\genmai\, second aorist middle). {After that I have preached to others} (\allois krxas\). First aorist active participle of \kruss\ (see on ¯1:23|), common verb to preach, from word \krux\ (herald) and that is probably the idea here. A \krux\ at the games announced the rules of the game and called out the competitors. Songs:Paul is not merely a herald, but a competitor also. {I myself should be rejected} (\autos adokimos genmai\). Literally, "I myself should become rejected." \Adokimos\ is an old adjective used of metals, coin, soil (Hebrews:6:8|) and in a moral sense only by Paul in N.T. (1Corinthians:9:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:5-7; strkjv@Romans:1:28; strkjv@Titus:1:16; strkjv@2Timothy:3:8|). It means not standing the test (\dokimos\ from \dokimaz\). Paul means rejected for the {prize}, not for the entrance to the race. He will fail to win if he breaks the rules of the game (Matthew:7:22f.|). What is the prize before Paul? Is it that {reward} (\misthos\) of which he spoke in verse 18|, his glorying of preaching a free gospel? Songs:Edwards argues. Most writers take Paul to refer to the possibility of his rejection in his personal salvation at the end of the race. He does not claim absolute perfection (Phillipians:3:12|) and so he presses on. At the end he has serene confidence (2Timothy:4:7|) with the race run and won. It is a humbling thought for us all to see this wholesome fear instead of smug complacency in this greatest of all heralds of Christ.
rwp@1Corinthians:12:10 @{Workings of miracles} (\energmata dunamen\). Workings of powers. Cf. \energn dunameis\ in strkjv@Galatians:3:5; strkjv@Hebrews:2:4| where all three words are used (\smeia\, signs, \terata\, wonders, \dunameis\, powers). Some of the miracles were not healings as the blindness on Elymas the sorcerer. {Prophecy} (\prophteia\). Late word from \prophts\ and \prophmi\, to speak forth. Common in papyri. This gift Paul will praise most (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:14|). Not always prediction, but a speaking forth of God's message under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. {Discernings of spirits} (\diakriseis pneumatn\). \Diakrisis\ is old word from \diakrin\ (see strkjv@11:29|) and in N.T. only here; strkjv@Romans:14:1; strkjv@Hebrews:5:14|. A most needed gift to tell whether the gifts were really of the Holy Spirit and supernatural (cf. so-called "gifts" today) or merely strange though natural or even diabolical (1Timothy:4:1; strkjv@1John:4:1f.|). {Divers kinds of tongues} (\gen glssn\). No word for "divers" in the Greek. There has arisen a great deal of confusion concerning the gift of tongues as found in Corinth. They prided themselves chiefly on this gift which had become a source of confusion and disorder. There were varieties (kinds, \gen\) in this gift, but the gift was essentially an ecstatic utterance of highly wrought emotion that edified the speaker (14:4|) and was intelligible to God (14:2,28|). It was not always true that the speaker in tongues could make clear what he had said to those who did not know the tongue (14:13|): It was not mere gibberish or jargon like the modern "tongues," but in a real language that could be understood by one familiar with that tongue as was seen on the great Day of Pentecost when people who spoke different languages were present. In Corinth, where no such variety of people existed, it required an interpreter to explain the tongue to those who knew it not. Hence Paul placed this gift lowest of all. It created wonder, but did little real good. This is the error of the Irvingites and others who have tried to reproduce this early gift of the Holy Spirit which was clearly for a special emergency and which was not designed to help spread the gospel among men. See on ¯Acts:2:13-21; strkjv@10:44-46; strkjv@19:6|. {The interpretation of tongues} (\hermneia glssn\). Old word, here only and strkjv@14:26| in N.T., from \hermneu\ from \Herms\ (the god of speech). Cf. on \diermneu\ in strkjv@Luke:24:27; strkjv@Acts:9:36|. In case there was no one present who understood the particular tongue it required a special gift of the Spirit to some one to interpret it if any one was to receive benefit from it.
rwp@1John:5:6 @{This} (\houtos\). Jesus the Son of God (verse 5|). {He that came} (\ho elthn\). Second aorist active articular participle of \erchomai\, referring to the Incarnation as a definite historic event, the preexistent Son of God "sent from heaven to do God's will" (Brooke). {By water and blood} (\di' hudatos kai haimatos\). Accompanied by (\dia\ used with the genitive both as instrument and accompaniment, as in strkjv@Galatians:5:13|) water (as at the baptism) and blood (as on the Cross). These two incidents in the Incarnation are singled out because at the baptism Jesus was formally set apart to his Messianic work by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon him and by the Father's audible witness, and because at the Cross his work reached its culmination ("It is finished," Jesus said). There are other theories that do not accord with the language and the facts. It is true that at the Cross both water and blood came out of the side of Jesus when pierced by the soldier, as John bore witness (John:19:34|), a complete refutation of the Docetic denial of an actual human body for Jesus and of the Cerinthian distinction between Jesus and Christ. There is thus a threefold witness to the fact of the Incarnation, but he repeats the twofold witness before giving the third. The repetition of both preposition (\en\ this time rather than \dia\) and the article (\ti\ locative case) argues for two separate events with particular emphasis on the blood ("not only" \ouk monon\, "but" \all'\) which the Gnostics made light of or even denied. {It is the Spirit that beareth witness} (\to pneuma estin to marturoun\). Present active articular participle of \marture\ with article with both subject and predicate, and so interchangeable as in strkjv@3:4|. The Holy Spirit is the third and the chief witness at the baptism of Jesus and all through his ministry. {Because} (\hoti\). Or declarative "that." Either makes sense. In strkjv@John:15:26| Jesus spoke of "the Spirit of truth" (whose characteristic is truth). Here John identifies the Spirit with truth as Jesus said of himself (John:14:6|) without denying personality for the Holy Spirit.
rwp@1John:5:16 @{If any man see} (\ean tis idi\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \eidon\ (\hora\). {Sinning a sin} (\hamartanonta hamartian\). Present active predicate (supplementary) participle agreeing with \adelphon\ and with cognate accusative \hamartian\. {Not unto death} (\m pros thanaton\). Repeated again with \hamartanousin\ and in contrast with \hamartia pros thanaton\ (sin unto death). Most sins are not mortal sins, but clearly John conceives of a sin that is deadly enough to be called "unto death." This distinction is common in the rabbinic writings and in strkjv@Numbers:18:22| the LXX has \labein hamartian thanatphoron\ "to incur a death-bearing sin" as many crimes then and now bear the death penalty. There is a distinction in strkjv@Hebrews:10:26| between sinning wilfully after full knowledge and sins of ignorance (Hebrews:5:2|). Jesus spoke of the unpardonable sin (Mark:3:29; strkjv@Matthew:12:32; strkjv@Luke:12:10|), which was attributing to the devil the manifest work of the Holy Spirit. It is possible that John has this idea in mind when he applies it to those who reject Jesus Christ as God's Son and set themselves up as antichrists. {Concerning this} (\peri ekeins\). This sin unto death. {That he should make request} (\hina ertsi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with the first aorist active subjunctive of \erta\, used here as in strkjv@John:17:15,20| (and often) for request rather than for question. John does not forbid praying for such cases; he simply does not command prayer for them. He leaves them to God.
rwp@1Peter:3:15 @{Sanctify} (\hagiasate\). First aorist active imperative of \hagiaz\. This instead of being afraid. {Christ as Lord} (\kurion ton Christon\). \Ton Christon\, direct object with article and \kurion\ predicate accusative (without article). This is the correct text, not \ton theon\ of the Textus Receptus. An adaptation to Christ of strkjv@Isaiah:8:13|. {Being ready always} (\hetoimoi aei\). No participle in the Greek, old adjective (Titus:3:1|). {To give answer} (\pros apologian\). "For an apology," the old sense of \apologia\, an answer back, a defence (not excuse), as in strkjv@Acts:22:1|, from \apologeomai\ to defend (not to apologize). {A reason concerning the hope that is in you} (\logon peri ts en humin elpidos\). Original sense of \logon\ (accusative of the thing with \aitounti\ with \hums\, accusative of the person) "concerning the in you hope." Ready with a spoken defence of the inward hope. This attitude calls for an intelligent grasp of the hope and skill in presenting it. In Athens every citizen was expected to be able to join in the discussion of state affairs. {Yet with meekness and fear} (\alla meta prauttos kai phobou\). Of God (2:18; strkjv@3:2,4|), not of man.
rwp@2Corinthians:5:13 @{Whether we are beside ourselves} (\eite exestmen\). Second aorist active indicative of \existmi\, old verb, here to stand out of oneself (intransitive) from \ekstasis\, ecstasy, comes as in strkjv@Mark:5:42|. It is literary plural, for Paul is referring only to himself. See on ¯1:6| for \eite--eite\. It is a condition of the first class and Paul assumes as true the charge that he was crazy (if I was crazy) for the sake of argument. Festus made it later (Acts:26:24|). He spoke with tongues (1Corinthians:14:18|) and had visions (2Corinthians:12:1-6|) which probably the Judaizers used against him. A like charge was made against Jesus (Mark:3:21|). People often accuse those whom they dislike with being a bit off.
rwp@2Corinthians:10:1 @{Now I Paul myself} (\Autos de eg Paulos\). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:5:2|. Paul now turns to the third part of the epistle in chapters 10-13| in which he vigorously defends himself against the accusations of the stubborn minority of Judaizers in Corinth. Great ministers of Christ through the ages have had to pass through fiery trials like these. Paul has shown the way for us all. He speaks of himself now plainly, but under compulsion, as is clear. It may be that at this point he took the pen from the amanuensis and wrote himself as in strkjv@Galatians:6:11|. {By the meekness and gentleness of Christ} (\dia tes prauttos kai epieikias tou Christou\). This appeal shows (Plummer) that Paul had spoken to the Corinthians about the character of Christ. Jesus claimed meekness for himself (Matthew:11:29|) and felicitated the meek (Matthew:5:5|) and he exemplified it abundantly (Luke:23:34|). See on ¯Matthew:5:15; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:21| for this great word that has worn thin with us. Plutarch combines \prauts\ with \epieikia\ as Paul does here. Matthew Arnold suggested "sweet reasonableness" for \epieikeia\ in Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch. It is in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:24:4| (\to epieikes\ in strkjv@Phillipians:4:5|). In Greek Ethics the equitable man was called \epieiks\, a man who does not press for the last farthing of his rights (Bernard). {Lowly among you} (\tapeinos en humin\). The bad use of \tapeinos\, the old use, but here alone in N.T. in that meaning. Socrates and Aristotle used it for littleness of soul. Probably Paul here is quoting one of the sneers of his traducers in Corinth about his humble conduct while with them (1Corinthians:2:23; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:6|) and his boldness (\apn tharr\) when away (1Corinthians:7:16|). "It was easy to satirize and misrepresent a depression of spirits, a humility of demeanour, which were either the direct results of some bodily affliction, or which the consciousness of this affliction had rendered habitual" (Farrar). The words stung Paul to the quick.
rwp@2Corinthians:10:10 @{They say} (\phasin\). Reading of B old Latin Vulgate, but Westcott and Hort prefer \phsin\ (says one, the leader). This charge Paul quotes directly. {Weighty and strong} (\bareiai kai ischurai\). These adjectives can be uncomplimentary and mean "severe and violent" instead of "impressive and vigorous." The adjectives bear either sense. {His bodily presence} (\h parousia tou smatos\). This certainly is uncomplimentary. "The presence of his body." It seems clear that Paul did not have a commanding appearance like that of Barnabas (Acts:14:12|). He had some physical defect of the eyes (Galatians:4:14|) and a thorn in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|). In the second century _Acts of Paul and Thecla_ he is pictured as small, short, bow-legged, with eye-brows knit together, and an aquiline nose. A forgery of the fourth century in the name of Lucian describes Paul as "the bald-headed, hook-nosed Galilean." However that may be, his accusers sneered at his personal appearance as "weak" (\asthens\). {His speech of no account} (\ho logos exouthenmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \exouthene\, to treat as nothing (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:1:28|). The Corinthians (some of them) cared more for the brilliant eloquence of Apollos and did not find Paul a trained rhetorician (1Corinthians:1:17; strkjv@2:1,4; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:6|). He made different impressions on different people. "Seldom has any one been at once so ardently hated and so passionately loved as St. Paul" (Deissmann, _St. Paul_, p. 70). "At one time he seemed like a man, and at another he seemed like an angel" (_Acts of Paul and Thecla_). He spoke like a god at Lystra (Acts:14:8-12|), but Eutychus went to sleep on him (Acts:20:9|). Evidently Paul winced under this biting criticism of his looks and speech.
rwp@2Peter:3:2 @{That ye should remember} (\mnsthnai\). First aorist passive (deponent) infinitive of \mimnsk\, to remind. Purpose (indirect command) is here expressed by this infinitive. Imperative in strkjv@Jude:1:17|. {Spoken before} (\proeirmenn\). Perfect passive participle of \proeipon\ (defective verb). Genitive case \rmatn\ after \mnsthnai\. {And the commandment} (\kai ts entols\). Ablative case with \hupo\ (agency). {Of the Lord and Saviour through your apostles} (\tn apostoln humn tou kuriou kai stros\). \Humn\ (your) is correct, not \hmn\ (our). But the several genitives complicate the sense. If \dia\ (through) occurred before \tn apostoln\, it would be clear. It is held by some that Peter would not thus speak of the twelve apostles, including himself, and that the forger here allows the mask to slip, but Bigg rightly regards this a needless inference. The meaning is that they should remember the teaching of their apostles and not follow the Gnostic libertines.
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:3 @{Let no man beguile you in any wise} (\m tis humas exapatsi kata mdena tropon\). First aorist active subjunctive of \exapata\ (old verb to deceive, strengthened form of simple verb \apata\) with double negative (\m tis, mdena\) in accord with regular Greek idiom as in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:11| rather than the aorist imperative which does occur sometimes in the third person as in strkjv@Mark:13:15| (\m katabat\). Paul broadens the warning to go beyond conversation and letter. He includes "tricks" of any kind. It is amazing how gullible some of the saints are when a new deceiver pulls off some stunts in religion. {For it will not be} (\hoti\). There is an ellipse here of \ouk estai\ (or \gensetai\) to be supplied after \hoti\. Westcott and Hort make an anacoluthon at the end of verse 4|. The meaning is clear. \Hoti\ is causal, because, but the verb is understood. The second coming not only is not "imminent," but will not take place before certain important things take place, a definite rebuff to the false enthusiasts of verse 2|. {Except the falling away come first} (\ean m elthi h apostasia prton\). Negative condition of the third class, undetermined with prospect of determination and the aorist subjunctive. \Apostasia\ is the late form of \apostasis\ and is our word apostasy. Plutarch uses it of political revolt and it occurs in I Macc. strkjv@2:15 about Antiochus Epiphanes who was enforcing the apostasy from Judaism to Hellenism. In strkjv@Joshua:22:22| it occurs for rebellion against the Lord. It seems clear that the word here means a religious revolt and the use of the definite article (\h\) seems to mean that Paul had spoken to the Thessalonians about it. The only other New Testament use of the word is in strkjv@Acts:21:21| where it means apostasy from Moses. It is not clear whether Paul means revolt of the Jews from God, of Gentiles from God, of Christians from God, or of the apostasy that includes all classes within and without the body of Christians. But it is to be {first} (\prton\) before Christ comes again. Note this adverb when only two events are compared (cf. strkjv@Acts:1:1|). {And the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition} (\kai apokaluphthi ho anthrpos ts anomias, ho huios ts apleias\). First aorist passive subjunctive after \ean m\ and same condition as with \elthi\. The use of this verb \apokalupt\, like \apokalupsin\ of the second coming in strkjv@1:7|, seems to note the superhuman character (Milligan) of the event and the same verb is repeated in verses 6,8|. The implication is that {the man of sin} is hidden somewhere who will be suddenly manifested just as false apostles pose as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:13ff.|), whether the crowning event of the apostasy or another name for the same event. Lightfoot notes the parallel between the man of sin, of whom sin is the special characteristic (genitive case, a Hebraism for the lawless one in verse 8|) and Christ. Both Christ and the adversary of Christ are revealed, there is mystery about each, both make divine claims (verse 4|). He seems to be the Antichrist of strkjv@1John:2:18|. The terrible phrase, the son of perdition, is applied to Judas in strkjv@John:17:12| (like Judas doomed to perdition), but here to the lawless one (\ho anomos\, verse 8|), who is not Satan, but some one definite person who is doing the work of Satan. Note the definite article each time.
rwp@Acts:2:4 @{With other tongues} (\heterais glssais\). Other than their native tongues. Each one began to speak in a language that he had not acquired and yet it was a real language and understood by those from various lands familiar with them. It was not jargon, but intelligible language. Jesus had said that the gospel was to go to all the nations and here the various tongues of earth were spoken. One might conclude that this was the way in which the message was to be carried to the nations, but future developments disprove it. This is a third miracle (the sound, the tongues like fire, the untaught languages). There is no blinking the fact that Luke so pictures them. One need not be surprised if this occasion marks the fulfilment of the Promise of the Father. But one is not to confound these miraculous signs with the Holy Spirit. They are merely proof that he has come to carry on the work of his dispensation. The gift of tongues came also on the house of Cornelius at Caesarea (Acts:10:44-47; strkjv@11:15-17|), the disciples of John at Ephesus (Acts:19:6|), the disciples at Corinth (1Corinthians:14:1-33|). It is possible that the gift appeared also at Samaria (Acts:8:18|). But it was not a general or a permanent gift. Paul explains in strkjv@1Corinthians:14:22| that "tongues" were a sign to unbelievers and were not to be exercised unless one was present who understood them and could translate them. This restriction disposes at once of the modern so-called tongues which are nothing but jargon and hysteria. It so happened that here on this occasion at Pentecost there were Jews from all parts of the world, so that some one would understand one tongue and some another without an interpreter such as was needed at Corinth. The experience is identical in all four instances and they are not for edification or instruction, but for adoration and wonder and worship. {As the Spirit gave them utterance} (\kaths to pneuma edidou apophtheggesthai autois\). This is precisely what Paul claims in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:10,28|, but all the same without an interpreter the gift was not to be exercised (1Corinthians:14:6-19|). Paul had the gift of tongues, but refused to exercise it except as it would be understood. Note the imperfect tense here (\edidou\). Perhaps they did not all speak at once, but one after another. \Apophtheggesthai\ is a late verb (LXX of prophesying, papyri). Lucian uses it of the ring of a vessel when it strikes a reef. It is used of eager, elevated, impassioned utterance. In the N.T. only here, verse 14; strkjv@26:25|. \Apophthegm\ is from this verb.
rwp@Acts:2:20 @{Shall be turned} (\metastraphsetai\). Second future passive of \metastreph\, common verb, but only three times in the N.T. (Acts:2:20| from Joel; strkjv@James:4:9; strkjv@Galatians:1:7|). These are the "wonders" or portents of verse 19|. It is worth noting that Peter interprets these "portents" as fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost, though no such change of the sun into darkness or of the moon into blood is recorded. Clearly Peter does not interpret the symbolism of Joel in literal terms. This method of Peter may be of some service in the Book of Revelation where so many apocalyptic symbols occur as well as in the great Eschatological Discourse of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:24,25|. In strkjv@Matthew:24:6,29| Jesus had spoken of wars on earth and wonders in heaven. {Before the day of the Lord come, that great and notable day} (\prin elthein hmeran kuriou tn megaln kai epiphan\). The use of \prin\ with the infinitive and the accusative of general reference is a regular Greek idiom. The use of the adjectives with the article is also good Greek, though the article is not here repeated as in strkjv@1:25|. The Day of the Lord is a definite conception without the article. {Notable} (\epiphan\) is the same root as epiphany (\epiphaneia\) used of the Second Coming of Christ (2Thessalonians:2:8; strkjv@1Timothy:6:14; strkjv@2Timothy:4:1; strkjv@Titus:2:13|). It translates here the Hebrew word for "terrible." In the Epistles the Day of the Lord is applied (Knowling) to the Coming of Christ for judgment (1Thessalonians:5:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:1:10|).
rwp@Acts:9:4 @{He fell upon the earth} (\pesn epi tn gn\). Second aorist active participle. Songs:in strkjv@22:7| Paul says: "I fell unto the ground" (\epesa eis to edaphos\) using an old word rather than the common \gn\. In strkjv@26:14| Paul states that "we were all fallen to the earth" (\pantn katapesontn hmn eis tn gn\, genitive absolute construction). But here in verse 7| "the men that journeyed with him stood speechless" (\histkeisan eneoi\). But surely the points of time are different. In strkjv@26:14| Paul refers to the first appearance of the vision when all fell to the earth. Here in verse 7| Luke refers to what occurred after the vision when both Saul and the men had risen from the ground. {Saul, Saul} (\Saoul, Saoul\). The Hebrew form occurs also in strkjv@22:7; strkjv@26:14| where it is expressly stated that the voice was in the Hebrew (Aramaic) tongue as also in strkjv@9:17| (Ananias). Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 316) terms this use of \Saoul\ "the historian's sense of liturgical rhythm." For the repetition of names by Jesus note strkjv@Luke:10:41| (Martha, Martha), strkjv@Luke:22:31| (Simon, Simon). {Me} (\me\). In persecuting the disciples, Saul was persecuting Jesus, as the words of Jesus in verse 5| made plain. Christ had already spoken of the mystic union between himself and his followers (Matthew:10:40; strkjv@25:40,45; strkjv@John:15:1-5|). The proverb (Pindar) that Jesus quotes to Saul about kicking against the goad is genuine in strkjv@26:14|, but not here.
rwp@Acts:10:35 @{Acceptable to him} (\dektos auti\). Verbal adjective from \dechomai\. _Acceptabilis_. That is to say, a Gentile would not have to become a Jew in order to become a Christian. Evidently Peter had not before perceived this fact. On the great Day of Pentecost when he spoke of the promise "to all those afar off" (2:39|) Peter understood that they must first become Jews and then Christians. The new idea that now makes a revolution in Peter's outlook is precisely this that Christ can and will save Gentiles like this Cornelius group without their becoming Jews at all.
rwp@Acts:10:47 @{Can any man forbid the water?} (\Mti to hudr dunatai klsai tis?\). The negative \mti\ expects the answer _No_. The evidence was indisputable that these Gentiles were converted and so were entitled to be baptized. See the similar idiom in strkjv@Luke:6:39|. Note the article with "water." Here the baptism of the Holy Spirit had preceded the baptism of water (Acts:1:5; strkjv@11:16|). "The greater had been bestowed; could the lesser be withheld?" (Knowling). {That these should not be baptized} (\tou m baptisthnai toutous\). Ablative case of the articular first aorist passive infinitive of \baptiz\ with the redundant negative after the verb of hindering (\klsai\) and the accusative of general reference (\toutous\). The redundant negative after the verb of hindering is not necessary though often used in ancient Greek and in the _Koin_ (papyri). Without it see strkjv@Matthew:19:14; strkjv@Acts:8:36| and with it see strkjv@Luke:4:42; strkjv@24:16; strkjv@Acts:14:18|. Cf. Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1061, 1094, 1171. The triple negatives here are a bit confusing to the modern mind (\mti\ in the question, \klsai\, to hinder or to cut off, \m\ with \baptisthnai\). Literally, Can any one cut off the water from the being baptized as to these? Meyer: "The water is in this animated language conceived as the element offering itself for the baptism." {As well as we} (\hs kai hmeis\). The argument was conclusive. God had spoken. Note the query of the eunuch to Philip (Acts:8:36|).
rwp@Acts:13:44 @{The next Sabbath} (\ti erchomeni sabbati\). Locative case, on the coming (\erchomeni\, present middle participle of \erchomai\) Sabbath. Songs:the best MSS., though some have \echomeni\ (present middle participle of \ech\ in sense of near, bordering, following as in strkjv@Luke:13:33; strkjv@Acts:29:15|). {Almost} (\schedon\). Old word, but in N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:19:26; strkjv@Hebrews:9:22|. {Was gathered together} (\sunchth\). First aorist (effective) passive indicative of \sunag\, old and common verb. The "whole city" could hardly all gather in the synagogue. Perhaps Paul spoke in the synagogue and Barnabas to the overflow outside (see verse 46|). It was an eager and earnest gathering "to hear (\akousai\, first aorist active infinitive of purpose) the word of God" and a great opportunity for Paul and Barnabas. The Codex Bezae has it "to hear Paul." It was the new preacher (Paul) that drew the big crowd. It was a crowd such as will later hang on the words of John Wesley and George Whitfield when they preach Jesus Christ.
rwp@Acts:14:9 @{The same} (\houtos\). Just "this one." {Heard} (\kouen\). Imperfect active, was listening to Paul speaking (\lalountos\). Either at the gate or in the market place (17:17|) Paul was preaching to such as would listen or could understand his Greek (_Koin_). Ramsay (_St. Paul the Traveller_, pp. 114, 116) thinks that the cripple was a proselyte. At any rate he may have heard of the miracles wrought at Iconium (verse 3|) and Paul may have spoken of the work of healing wrought by Jesus. This man was "no mendicant pretender," for his history was known from his birth. {Fastening his eyes upon him} (\atenisas auti\). Just as in strkjv@13:9| of Paul and strkjv@1:10| which see. Paul saw a new hope in the man's eyes and face. {He had faith} (\echei pistin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse. {To be made whole} (\tou sthnai\). Genitive of articular first aorist passive infinitive (purpose and result combined) of \sz\, to make sound and also to save. Here clearly to make whole or well as in strkjv@Luke:7:50| (cf. strkjv@Acts:3:16; strkjv@4:10|).
rwp@Acts:14:14 @{Having heard} (\akousantes\). Such elaborate preparation "with the multitudes" (\sun tois ochlois\) spread rumours and some who spoke Greek told Paul and Barnabas. It is possible that the priest of Jupiter may have sent a formal request that the visiting "gods" might come out to the statue by the temple gates to make it a grand occasion. They rent their garments (\diarrxantes\). First aorist active participle from \diarrgnumi\, old verb to rend in two. Like the high priest in strkjv@Matthew:26:65| as if an act of sacrilege was about to be committed. It was strange conduct for the supposed gods! {Sprang forth} (\exepdsan\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \ekpda\ (note \ek\), old verb, here only in the N.T. It was all a sign of grief and horror with loud outcries (\krazontes\).
rwp@Acts:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo ts Ioudaias\). Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (11:2|) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (13:13|) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18|) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord's doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Acts:15:24|). In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty." It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts strkjv@15:5-29| in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in strkjv@11:29f|. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in strkjv@11:29f.|, but only "the elders." In strkjv@Acts:15| Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In strkjv@Galatians:2:2| by the use of "them" (\autois\) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses strkjv@15:5-6|. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18|), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew:15:24ff.|). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. Songs:one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest. {Taught the brethren} (\edidaskon tous adelphous\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (11:20-26|), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis. {Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved} (\ean me peritmthte ti ethei Muses, ou dunasthe sthnai\). There was the dictum of the Judaizers to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had been circumcised. This is probably the precise language employed, for they spoke in Greek to these Greeks. It is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, \ean\ plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peritemn\). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (\ti ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\sthnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.
rwp@Acts:17:32 @{The resurrection of the dead} (\anastasin nekrn\). Rather, "a resurrection of dead men." No article with either word. The Greeks believed that the souls of men lived on, but they had no conception of resurrection of the body. They had listened with respect till Paul spoke of the actual resurrection of Jesus from the dead as a fact, when they did not care to hear more. {Some mocked} (\hoi men echleuazon\). Imperfect active of \chleuaz\, a common verb (from \chleu\, jesting, mockery). Only here in the N.T. though late MSS. have it in strkjv@2:13| (best MSS. \diachleuaz\). Probably inchoative here, began to mock. In contempt at Paul's statement they declined to listen further to "this babbler" (verse 18|) who had now lost what he had gained with this group of hearers (probably the light and flippant Epicureans). {But others} (\hoi de\). A more polite group like those who had invited him to speak (verse 19|). They were unconvinced, but had better manners and so were in favour of an adjournment. This was done, though it is not clear whether it was a serious postponement or a courteous refusal to hear Paul further (probably this). It was a virtual dismissal of the matter. " It is a sad story--the noblest of ancient cities and the noblest man of history--and he never cared to look on it again" (Furneaux).
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:19:9 @{But when some were hardened} (\hs de tines esklrunonto\). Imperfect passive of \sklrun\, causative like _hiphil_ in Hebrew, to make hard (\sklros\) or rough or harsh (Matthew:25:24|). In LXX and Hippocrates and Galen (in medical writings). In N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:18| and 4 times in strkjv@Hebrews:3:8,13,15; strkjv@4:7,8| quoting and referring to strkjv@Psalms:95:8| about hardening the heart like a gristle. The inevitable reaction against Paul went on even in Ephesus though slowly. {Disobedient} (\epeithoun\). Imperfect again, showing the growing disbelief and disobedience (\apeiths\), both ideas as in strkjv@14:2; strkjv@17:5|, first refusal to believe and then refusal to obey. Both \sklrun\ and \apeithe\ occur together, as here, in Ecclus. strkjv@30:12. {Speaking evil of the Way} (\kakologountes tn hodon\). Late verb from \kakologos\ (speaker of evil) for the old \kaks leg\. Already in strkjv@Mark:7:10; strkjv@9:39; strkjv@Matthew:15:4|. Now these Jews are aggressive opponents of Paul and seek to injure his influence with the crowd. Note "the Way" as in strkjv@9:2| for Christianity. {He departed from them} (\apostas ap' autn\). Second aorist active participle of \aphistmi\, made an "apostasy" (standing off, cleavage) as he did at Corinth (18:7|, \metabas\, making a change). {Separated the disciples} (\aphrisen tous mathtas\). First aorist active indicative of \aphoriz\, old verb to mark limits (horizon) as already in strkjv@13:2|. Paul himself was a spiritual Pharisee "separated" to Christ (Romans:1:1|). The Jews regarded this withdrawal as apostasy, like separating the sheep from the goats (Matthew:25:32|). Paul now made a separate church as he had done at Thessalonica and Corinth. {In the school of Tyrannus} (\en ti scholi Turannou\). \Schol\ (our school) is an old word from \schein\ (\ech\) to hold on, leisure and then in later Greek (Plutarch, etc.) a place where there is leisure as here. Only this example in the N.T. This is the Greek notion of "school," the Jewish being that of "yoke" as in strkjv@Matthew:11:29|. The name Tyrannus (our tyrant) is a common one. It is an inscription in the Columbarium of the Empress Livia as that of a physician in the court. Furneaux suggests the possibility that a relative of this physician was lecturing on medicine in Ephesus and so as a friend of Luke, the physician, would be glad to help Paul about a place to preach. It was probably a public building or lecture hall with this name whether hired by Paul or loaned to him. The pagan sophists often spoke in such halls. The Codex Bezae adds "from the fifth hour to the tenth" as the time allotted Paul for his work in this hall, which is quite possible, from just before midday till the close of the afternoon (from before the noon meal till two hours before sunset) each day. Here Paul had great freedom and a great hearing. As the church grows there will be other places of meeting as the church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla (1Corinthians:16:19|).
rwp@Acts:20:7 @{Upon the first day of the week} (\en de mii tn sabbatn\). The cardinal \mii\ used here for the ordinal \prti\ (Mark:16:9|) like the Hebrew _ehadh_ as in strkjv@Mark:16:2; strkjv@Matthew:28:1; strkjv@Luke:24:1; strkjv@John:20:1| and in harmony with the _Koin_ idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 671). Either the singular (Mark:16:9|) \sabbatou\ or the plural \sabbaton\ as here was used for the week (sabbath to sabbath). For the first time here we have services mentioned on the first day of the week though in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:2| it is implied by the collections stored on that day. In strkjv@Revelation:1:10| the Lord's day seems to be the day of the week on which Jesus rose from the grave. Worship on the first day of the week instead of the seventh naturally arose in Gentile churches, though strkjv@John:20:26| seems to mean that from the very start the disciples began to meet on the first (or eighth) day. But liberty was allowed as Paul makes plain in strkjv@Romans:14:5f|. {When we were gathered together} (\sungmenn hmn\). Genitive absolute, perfect passive participle of \sunag\, to gather together, a formal meeting of the disciples. See this verb used for gatherings of disciples in strkjv@Acts:4:31; strkjv@11:26; strkjv@14:27; strkjv@15:6,30; strkjv@19:7,8; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:4|. In strkjv@Hebrews:10:25| the substantive \episunaggn\ is used for the regular gatherings which some were already neglecting. It is impossible for a church to flourish without regular meetings even if they have to meet in the catacombs as became necessary in Rome. In Russia today the Soviets are trying to break up conventicles of Baptists. They probably met on our Saturday evening, the beginning of the first day at sunset. Songs:these Christians began the day (Sunday) with worship. But, since this is a Gentile community, it is quite possible that Luke means our Sunday evening as the time when this meeting occurs, and the language in strkjv@John:20:19| "it being evening on that day the first day of the week" naturally means the evening following the day, not the evening preceding the day. {To break bread} (\klasai arton\). First aorist active infinitive of purpose of \kla\. The language naturally bears the same meaning as in strkjv@2:42|, the Eucharist or the Lord's Supper which usually followed the \Agap\. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:16|. The time came, when the \Agap\ was no longer observed, perhaps because of the abuses noted in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20ff|. Rackham argues that the absence of the article with bread here and its presence (\ton arton\) in verse 11| shows that the \Agap\ is ] referred to in verse 7| and the Eucharist in verse 11|, but not necessarily so because \ton arton\ may merely refer to \arton\ in verse 7|. At any rate it should be noted that Paul, who conducted this service, was not a member of the church in Troas, but only a visitor. {Discoursed} (\dielegeto\). Imperfect middle because he kept on at length. {Intending} (\mell\). Being about to, on the point of. {On the morrow} (\ti epaurion\). Locative case with \hmeri\ understood after the adverb \epaurion\. If Paul spoke on our Saturday evening, he made the journey on the first day of the week (our Sunday) after sunrise. If he spoke on our Sunday evening, then he left on our Monday morning. {Prolonged his speech} (\Pareteinen ton logon\). Imperfect active (same form as aorist) of \paratein\, old verb to stretch beside or lengthwise, to prolong. Vivid picture of Paul's long sermon which went on and on till midnight (\mechri mesonuktiou\). Paul's purpose to leave early next morning seemed to justify the long discourse. Preachers usually have some excuse for the long sermon which is not always clear to the exhausted audience.
rwp@Acts:20:38 @{Sorrowing} (\odunmenoi\). Present middle participle of \oduna\, old verb to cause intense pain, to torment (Luke:16:24|), middle to distress oneself (Luke:2:48; strkjv@Acts:20:38|). Nowhere else in N.T. {Which he had spoken} (\hi eirkei\). Relative attracted to the case of the antecedent \logi\ (word). Past perfect indicative of \eipon\. {They brought him on his way} (\proepempon auton\). Imperfect active of \propemp\, old verb to send forward, to accompany as in strkjv@Acts:15:3; strkjv@20:38; strkjv@21:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:6,11; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:16; strkjv@Titus:3:13; strkjv@3John:1:6|. Graphic picture of Paul's departure from this group of ministers.
rwp@Acts:23:11 @{The night following} (\ti epiousi nukti\). Locative case, on the next (following) night. {The Lord} (\ho kurios\). Jesus. Paul never needed Jesus more than now. On a previous occasion the whole church prayed for Peter's release (12:5|), but Paul clearly had no such grip on the church as that, though he had been kindly welcomed (21:18|). In every crisis Jesus appears to him (cf. strkjv@Acts:18:9|). It looked dark for Paul till Jesus spoke. Once before in Jerusalem Jesus spoke words of cheer (22:18|). Then he was told to leave Jerusalem. Now he is to have "cheer" or "courage" (\tharsei\). Jesus used this very word to others (Matthew:9:2,22; strkjv@Mark:10:49|). It is a brave word. {Thou hast testified} (\diemartur\). First aorist middle indicative second person singular of \diamarturomai\, strong word (see on ¯22:18|). {Must thou} (\se dei\). That is the needed word and on this Paul leans. His hopes (19:21|) of going to Rome will not be in vain. He can bide Christ's time now. And Jesus has approved his witness in Jerusalem.
rwp@Acts:28:25 @{When they agreed not} (\asumphnoi ontes\). Old adjective, only here in N.T., double compound (\a\ privative, \sum, phn\), without symphony, out of harmony, dissonant, discordant. It was a triumph to gain adherents at all in such an audience. {They departed} (\apeluonto\). Imperfect middle (direct) indicative, "They loosed themselves from Paul." Graphic close. {After that Paul had spoken one word} (\eipontos tou Paulou rhma hen\). Genitive absolute. One last word (like a preacher) after the all day exposition. {Well} (\kals\). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:14:7; strkjv@Mark:7:6,9| (irony). Here strong indignation in the very position of the word (Page). {To your fathers} (\pros tous pateras humn\). Songs:Aleph A B instead of \hmn\ (our) like Stephen in strkjv@7:52| whose words Paul had heard. By mentioning the Holy Spirit Paul shows (Knowling) that they are resisting God (7:52|).
rwp@Ephesians:2:20 @{Being built upon} (\epoikodomthentes\). First aorist passive participle of \epoikodome\, for which double compound verb see strkjv@1Corinthians:3:10; Co; strkjv@2:17|. {The foundation} (\epi ti themelii\). Repetition of \epi\ with the locative case. See strkjv@1Corinthians:3:11| for this word. {Of the apostles and prophets} (\ton apostoln kai prophtn\). Genitive of apposition with \themelii\, consisting in. If one is surprised that Paul should refer so to the apostles, he being one himself, Peter does the same thing (2Peter:3:2|). Paul repeats this language in strkjv@3:5|. {Christ Jesus himself being the chief corner stone} (\onts akrognianiou autou Christou Isou\). Genitive absolute. The compound \akrogniaios\ occurs only in the LXX (first in strkjv@Isaiah:28:16|) and in the N.T. (here, strkjv@1Peter:2:6|). \Lithos\ (stone) is understood. Jesus had spoken of himself as the stone, rejected by the Jewish builders (experts), but chosen of God as the head of the corner (Matthew:21:42|), \eis kephaln gnias\. "The \akrogniaios\ here is the primary foundation-stone at the angle of the structure by which the architect fixes a standard for the bearings of the walls and cross-walls throughout" (W. W. Lloyd).
rwp@Ephesians:4:15 @{In love} (\en agapi\). If truth were always spoken only in love! {May grow into him} (\auxsmen eis auton\). Supply \hina\ and then note the final use of the first aorist active subjunctive. It is the metaphor of verse 13| (the full-grown man). We are the body and Christ is the Head. We are to grow up to his stature.
rwp@Galatians:2:15 @{Not sinners of the Gentiles} (\ouk ex ethnn hamartloi\). The Jews regarded all Gentiles as "sinners" in contrast with themselves (cf. strkjv@Matthew:26:45| "sinners" and strkjv@Luke:18:32| "Gentiles"). It is not clear whether verses 15-21| were spoken by Paul to Peter or whether Paul is now simply addressing the Galatians in the light of the controversy with Peter. Burton thinks that he is "mentally addressing Peter, if not quoting from what he said to him."
rwp@Galatians:4:24 @{Which things contain an allegory} (\hatina estin allgoroumena\). Literally, "Which things are allegorized" (periphrastic present passive indicative of \allgore\). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used \ainittomai\ to speak in riddles. It is compounded of \allo\, another, and \agoreu\, to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses \tupiks\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11| of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_, the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|, the Good Shepherd in strkjv@John:10|. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo's allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it. {For these are} (\hautai gar eisin\). Allegorically interpreted, he means. {From Mount Sinai} (\apo orous Sin\). Spoken from Mount Sinai. {Bearing} (\gennsa\). Present active participle of \genna\, to beget of the male (Matthew:1:1-16|), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke:1:13,57|). {Which is Hagar} (\htis estin Hagar\). Allegorically interpreted.
rwp@Galatians:6:18 @The farewell salutation is much briefer than that in strkjv@2Corinthians:13:13|, but identical with that in strkjv@Philemon:1:25|. He calls them "brethren" (\adelphoi\) in spite of the sharp things spoken to them.
rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE PICTURE OF CHRIST At once we are challenged by the bold stand taken by the author concerning the Person of Christ as superior to the prophets of the Old Testament because he is the Son of God through whom God has spoken in the new dispensation (Hebrews:1:1-3|), this Son who is God's Agent in the work of creation and of grace as we see it stated in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11; strkjv@Colossians:1:13-20; strkjv@John:1:1-18|. This high doctrine of Jesus as God's Son with the glory and stamp of God's nature is never lowered, for as God's Son he is superior to angels (Hebrews:1:4-2:4|), though the humanity of Jesus is recognized as one proof of the glory of Jesus (Hebrews:2:5-18|). Jesus is shown to be superior to Moses as God's Son over God's house (Hebrews:3:1-4:13|), But the chief portion of the Epistle is devoted to the superiority of Jesus Christ as priest to the work of Aaron and the whole Levitical line (Hebrews:4:14-12:3|). Here the author with consummate skill, though with rabbinical refinements at times, shows that Jesus is like Melchizedek and so superior to Aaron (Hebrews:4:14-7:28|), works under a better covenant of grace (Hebrews:8:1-13|), works in a better sanctuary which is in heaven (Hebrews:9:1-12|), offers a better sacrifice which is his own blood (Hebrews:9:13-10:18|), and gives us better promises for the fulfilment of his task (Hebrews:10:19-12:3|). Hence this Epistle deserves to be called the Epistle of the Priesthood of Christ. Songs:W. P. Du Bose calls his exposition of the book, _High Priesthood and Sacrifice_ (1908). This conception of Christ as our Priest who offered himself on the Cross and as our Advocate with the Father runs all through the New Testament (Mark:10:46; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@John:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Romans:8:32; strkjv@1Peter:1:18f.; strkjv@1John:2:1f.; strkjv@Revelation:5:9|, etc.). But it is in Hebrews that we have the full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as our Priest and Redeemer. The Glory of Jesus runs through the whole book.
rwp@Info_Hebrews @ SOME BOOKS ON HEBREWS ANDEL, _Deuteronomy:Brief aan de Hebraer_ (1906). ANDERSON, R., _The Hebrews Epistle in the Light of the Types_ (1911). AYLES, _Destination, Date and Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). BAILEY, _Leading Ideas of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1907). BLASS, F., _Brief an die Hebraer, Text, Angabe der Rhythmen_ (1903). BLEEK, F., _Der Hebraerbrief Erklart_ (1840). BRUCE, A. B., _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). DALE, R. W., _The Jewish Temple in the Christian Church_ (1865). DAVIDSON, A. B., _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1882). DELITZSCH, F., _Commentary on the Hebrews_ (1857). DIBELIUS, M., _Der Verfasser des Hebraerbriefes_ (1910). DODS, M., _Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1910). DU BOSE, W. P., _High Priesthood and sacrifice_ (1908). EDWARDS, T. C., _Expositor's Bible_ (1888). FARRAR, F. W., _Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1893). GOODSPEED, E. J., _Bible for Home and School_ (1908). GRIFFTH-THOMAS, W. H., _Let Us Go On_ (1923). HEIGL, _Verfalser und Addresse des Briefes an die Hebraer_ (1905). HOLLMANN, _Schriften d. N. T_. 2 Aufl. (1907). KENDRICK, A. C., _American Commentary_ (1890). LIDGETT, J. S., _Sonship and Salvation_ (1921). LOWRIE, _An Explanation of Hebrews_ (1921). LUNEMANN, G., _Meyer Komm_. (1882). MACFADYEN, J. F., _Through the Eternal Spirit_ (1925). MACNEILL, _The Christology of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1914). MENEGOZ, E., _Lamentations:Theologie de l'epitre aux Hebreaux_ (1894). MILLIGAN, G., _The Theology of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). MOFFATT JAMES, _Int. and Cosit. Comm_. (1924) MOULE, H. C., _Messages from the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1909). MURRAY, ANDREW, _Devotional Commentary_. NAIRNE, A., _The Epistle of Priesthood_ (1913). NAIRNE, A., _The Alexandrian Gospel_ (1917). PEAKE, A. S., _New Century Bible_ (1904). PORTER, S. J., _The Twelve-Gemmed Crown_ (1913). RENDALL, F., _The Theology of the Hebrew Christians_ (1886). RIGGENBACH, M., _Zoeckler Komm_. 2 Aufl. (1913). ROTHERHAM, _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1906). SAPHIR, A., _Exposition of Hebrews_. SCOTT, E. F., _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1922). SEEBERG, A., _Der Brief an die Hebraer_ (1912). SLOT, _Deuteronomy:Letterkundige Vorm van den Brief aan de Hebraer (1912). SODEN, VON, _Hand-Comm_. (1899). THOLUCK, A., _Komm. zum Briefe an die Hebraer_. VAUGHAN, C. J., _Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). WADE, _The Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1923). WEISS, B., _Meyer-Komm_. 6 Aufl. (1902). WEISS, B., _Der Hebraerbrief in Zeitgeschichtlicher Bekuch- tung_ (1910). WELCH, _Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews_ (1899). WESTCOTT, B. F., _Epistle to the Hebrews_ (3rd ed. 1906). WICKHAM, E. C., _Westminster Comm_. (1910). WINDISCH, H., _Handbuch zum N.T_. (1913). WREDE, W., _Das literarisches Ratsel des Hebraerbriefs_ (1906). strkjv@Hebrews:1:1 @{God} (\ho theos\). This Epistle begins like Genesis and the Fourth Gospel with God, who is the Author of the old revelation in the prophets and of the new in his Son. Verses 1-3| are a _proemium_ (Delitzsch) or introduction to the whole Epistle. The periodic structure of the sentence (1-4|) reminds one of strkjv@Luke:1:1-4, strkjv@Romans:1:1-7, strkjv@1John:1:1-4|. The sentence could have concluded with \en huii\ in verse 2|, but by means of three relatives (\hon, di' hou, hos\) the author presents the Son as "the exact counterpart of God" (Moffatt). {Of old time} (\palai\). "Long ago" as in strkjv@Matthew:11:21|. {Having spoken} (\lalsas\). First aorist active participle of \lale\, originally chattering of birds, then used of the highest form of speech as here. {Unto the fathers} (\tois patrasin\). Dative case. The Old Testament worthies in general without "our" or "your" as in strkjv@John:6:58; strkjv@7:22; strkjv@Romans:9:5|. {In the prophets} (\en tois prophtais\). As the quickening power of their life (Westcott). strkjv@Songs:4:7|. {By divers portions} (\polumers\). "In many portions." Adverb from late adjective \polumers\ (in papyri), both in _Vettius Valens_, here only in N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:22 and Josephus (_Ant_. VIII, 3, 9). The Old Testament revelation came at different times and in various stages, a progressive revelation of God to men. {In divers manners} (\polutrops\). "In many ways." Adverb from old adjective \polutropos\, in Philo, only here in N.T. The two adverbs together are "a sonorous hendiadys for 'variously'" (Moffatt) as Chrysostom (\diaphors\). God spoke by dream, by direct voice, by signs, in different ways to different men (Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, etc.).
rwp@Hebrews:1:2 @{At the end of these days} (\ep' eschatou tn hmern toutn\). In contrast with \palai\ above. {Hath spoken} (\elalsen\). First aorist indicative of \lale\, the same verb as above, "did speak" in a final and full revelation. {In his Son} (\en huii\). In sharp contrast to \en tois prophtais\. "The Old Testament slopes upward to Christ" (J. R. Sampey). No article or pronoun here with the preposition \en\, giving the absolute sense of "Son." Here the idea is not merely what Jesus said, but what he is (Dods), God's Son who reveals the Father (John:1:18|). "The revelation was a _son-revelation_" (Vincent). {Hath appointed} (\ethken\). First aorist (kappa aorist) active of \tithmi\, a timeless aorist. {Heir of all things} (\klronomon pantn\). See strkjv@Mark:12:6| for \ho klronomos\ in Christ's parable, perhaps an allusion here to this parable (Moffatt). The idea of sonship easily passes into that of heirship (Galatians:4:7; strkjv@Romans:8:17|). See the claim of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@28:18| even before the Ascension. {Through whom} (\di' hou\). The Son as Heir is also the Intermediate Agent (\dia\) in the work of creation as we have it in strkjv@Colossians:1:16f.; strkjv@John:1:3|. {The worlds} (\tous ainas\). "The ages" (_secula_, Vulgate). See strkjv@11:3| also where \tous ainas=ton kosmon\ (the world) or the universe like \ta panta\ (the all things) in strkjv@1:3; strkjv@Romans:11:36; strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. The original sense of \ain\ (from \aei\, always) occurs in strkjv@Hebrews:5:20|, but here "by metonomy of the container for the contained" (Thayer) for "the worlds" (the universe) as in LXX, Philo, Josephus.
rwp@Hebrews:3:5 @{And Moses} (\kai Muss men\). "Now Moses indeed on his part" (\men\ contrasted with \de\). {In} (\en\). Moses was in "God's house" "as a servant" (\hs therapn\). Old word, in LXX, only here in N.T. and quoted from strkjv@Numbers:12:7f|. Kin to the verb \therapeu\, to serve, to heal, and \therapeia\, service (Luke:9:11|) and a group of servants (Luke:12:42|). {For a testimony of those things which were afterward to be spoken} (\eis marturion tn lalthsomenn\). Objective genitive of the articular future passive participle of \lale\. It is not certain what it means whether the "testimony" (\marturion\) is to Moses or to God and whether it points on to Christ. In strkjv@9:9| see \parabol\ applied to the old dispensation as a symbol pointing to Christ and Christianity. {But Christ} (\Christos de\). In contrast with Moses (\men\ in verse 5|). {As a son} (\hs huios\). Instead of a \therapn\ (servant). {Over his house} (\epi ton oikon autou\). The difference between \epi\ and \en\ added to that between \huios\ and \therapn\. It is very neat and quite conclusive, especially when we recall the high place occupied by Moses in Jewish thought. In strkjv@Acts:7:11| the Jews accused Stephen of speaking "blasphemous words against Moses and God" (putting Moses on a par with God).
rwp@Hebrews:4:3 @{Do enter} (\eiserchometha\). Emphatic futuristic present middle indicative of \eiserchomai\. We are sure to enter in, we who believe. {He hath said} (\eirken\). Perfect active indicative for the permanent value of God's word as in strkjv@1:13; strkjv@4:4; strkjv@10:9,13; strkjv@13:5; strkjv@Acts:13:34|. God has spoken. That is enough for us. Songs:he quotes again what he has in verse 11| from strkjv@Psalms:95|. {Although the works were finished} (\kaitoi tn ergn genthentn\). Genitive absolute with concessive use of the participle. Old particle, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:14:17| (with verb). {From the foundation of the world} (\apo katabols kosmou\). \Katabol\, late word from \kataball\, usually laying the foundation of a house in the literal sense. In the N.T. usually with \apo\ (Matthew:25:44|) or \pro\ (John:17:24|) about the foundation of the world.
rwp@Hebrews:4:12 @{The word of God} (\ho logos tou theou\). That just quoted about the promise of rest and God's rest, but true of any real word of God. {Living} (\zn\). Cf. the Living God (3:12|). In Philo and the Book of Wisdom the Logos of God is personified, but still more in strkjv@John:1:1-18| where Jesus is pictured as the Logos on a par with God. "Our author is using Philonic language rather than Philonic ideas" (Moffatt). See strkjv@John:6:63|: "The words which I have spoken are spirit and are life." {Active} (\energs\). Energetic, powerful (John:1:12; strkjv@Phillipians:3:21; strkjv@Colossians:1:29|). {Sharper} (\tomteros\). Comparative of \tomos\, cutting (from \temn\, to cut), late adjective, here only in the N.T. {Than} (\huper\). Often so after a comparative (Luke:16:8; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:13|). {Two-edged} (\distomon\). "Two-mouthed" (\di-, stoma\), double-mouthed like a river (Polybius), branching ways (Sophocles), applied to sword (\xiphos\) by Homer and Euripides. {Piercing} (\diiknoumenos\). Present middle participle of \diikneomai\, old verb to go through, here only in N.T. {Even to the dividing} (\achri merismou\). Old word from \meriz\ (\meros\, part), to partition. {Of soul and spirit} (\psuchs kai pneumatos\). As in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:45|, but not an argument for trichotomy. Psychology is constantly changing its terminology. {Of both joints and marrow} (\harmn te kai mueln\). From \ar\, to join, comes \harmos\, old word, here only in the N.T. \Muelos\ (from \mu\, to shut), old word, here only in N.T. This surgeon goes into and through the joints and marrow, not cleaving between them. {Quick to discern} (\kritikos\). Verbal adjective in \-ikos\, from \krin\, skilled in judging, as the surgeon has to be and able to decide on the instant what to do. Songs:God's word like his eye sees the secret lurking doubt and unbelief "of the thoughts and intents of the heart" (\enthumsen kai ennoin kardias\). The surgeon carries a bright and powerful light for every dark crevice and a sharp knife for the removal of all the pus revealed by the light. It is a powerful picture here drawn.
rwp@Hebrews:9:19 @{When every commandment had been spoken} (\laltheiss\). Genitive absolute with first aorist passive participle feminine singular of \lale\. The author uses the account in strkjv@Exodus:24:3f.| "with characteristic freedom" (Moffatt). There is nothing there about the water, the scarlet wool (\erion\, diminutive of \eros, eiros\, old word, here and in strkjv@Revelation:1:14|; for \kokkinos\ see on ¯Matthew:27:6,28|), and hyssop (\husspou\, a plant mentioned in strkjv@John:19:29|). It had become the custom to mingle water with the blood and to use a wisp of wool or a stem of hyssop for sprinkling (Numbers:10:2-10|). {Both the book itself} (\auto te to biblion\). There is nothing in Exodus about sprinkling the book of the covenant, though it may very well have been done. He omits the use of oil in strkjv@Exodus:40:9f.; strkjv@Leviticus:8:10f.| and applies blood to all the details. {Sprinkled} (\erantisen\). First aorist active indicative from \rantiz\ (from \rantos\ and this from \rain\), like \baptiz\ from \bapt\. Cf. strkjv@Mark:7:4; strkjv@Hebrews:10:22; strkjv@Revelation:19:13|.
rwp@Hebrews:12:19 @{Unto blackness} (\gnophi\). Dative case of \gnophos\ (late form for earlier \dnophos\ and kin to \nephos\, cloud), here only in N.T. Quoted here from strkjv@Exodus:10:22|. {Darkness} (\zophi\). Old word, in Homer for the gloom of the world below. In the Symmachus Version of strkjv@Exodus:10:22|, also in strkjv@Jude:1:6; strkjv@2Peter:2:4,15|. {Tempest} (\thuelli\). Old word from \thu\ (to boil, to rage), a hurricane, here only in N.T. From strkjv@Exodus:10:22|. {The sound of a trumpet} (\salpiggos chi\). From strkjv@Exodus:19:16|. \Echos\ is an old word (our \echo\) as in strkjv@Luke:21:25; strkjv@Acts:2:2|. {The voice of words} (\phni rmatn\). From strkjv@Exodus:19:19; strkjv@Deuteronomy:4:12|. {Which voice} (\hs\). Relative referring to \phn\ (voice) just before, genitive case with \akousantes\ (heard, aorist active participle). {Intreated} (\paritsanto\). First aorist middle (indirect) indicative of \paraiteomai\, old verb, to ask from alongside (Mark:15:6|), then to beg away from oneself, to depreciate as here, to decline (Acts:25:11|), to excuse (Luke:14:18|), to avoid (1Timothy:4:7|). {That no word should be spoken unto them} (\prostethnai autois logon\). First aorist passive infinitive of \prostithmi\, old word to add, here with accusative of general reference (\logon\), "that no word be added unto them." Some MSS. have here a redundant negative \m\ with the infinitive because of the negative idea in \paritsanto\ as in strkjv@Galatians:5:7|.
rwp@James:2:11 @{He that said} (\ho eipn\) {--said also} (\eipen kai\). The unity of the law lies in the Lawgiver who spoke both prohibitions (\m\ and the aorist active subjunctive in each one, \moicheusis, phoneusis\). The order here is that of B in strkjv@Exodus:20| (Luke:18:20; strkjv@Romans:13:9|), but not in strkjv@Matthew:5:21,27| (with \ou\ and future indicative). {Now if thou dost not commit adultery, but killest} (\ei de ou moicheueis, phoneueis de\). Condition of first class with \ou\ (not \m\) because of the contrast with \de\, whereas \ei m\ would mean "unless," a different idea. Songs:\ou\ in strkjv@1:23|. {A transgressor of the law} (\parabats nomou\) as in verse 9|. Murder springs out of anger (Matthew:5:21-26|). People free from fleshly sins have often "made their condemnation of fleshly sins an excuse for indulgence towards spiritual sins" (Hort).
rwp@James:4:9 @{Be afflicted} (\talaiprsate\). First aorist active imperative \talaipre\, old verb from \talaipros\ (Romans:7:24|), to endure toils, here only in N.T. Cf. \talaipriais\ in strkjv@5:1|. {Mourn} (\penthsate\). First aorist active imperative of \penthe\, old verb from \penthos\ (mourning, strkjv@4:9|), as in strkjv@Matthew:5:4f|. Often in N.T. joined as here with \klai\, to weep (Mark:16:10; strkjv@Luke:6:25|). A call to the godly sorrow spoken of in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:10| (Mayor), like an O.T. prophet. {Weep} (\klausate\). First aorist active imperative of \klai\. {Laughter} (\gels\). Old word from Homer down, only here in N.T. as \gela\, to {laugh} (opposite of \klai\), in N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:6:21,25|, but \katagela\ in strkjv@Luke:8:53| (Mark:5:40; strkjv@Matthew:9:24|). {Be turned} (\metatrapt\). Second aorist passive imperative of \metatrep\, old word, to turn about, to transmute, in Homer (not in Attic), here only in N.T. {Heaviness} (\katpheian\). Old word from \katphs\ (of a downcast look, from \kata\, \pha\ eyes), hanging down of the eyes like the publican in strkjv@Luke:18:13|, here only in N.T.
rwp@Info_John @ A DIFFERENT STYLE OF TEACHING Songs:different is it in fact that some men bluntly assert that Jesus could not have spoken in the same fashion as presented in the Synoptics and in the Fourth Gospel. Such critics need to recall the Socrates of Xenophon's _Memorabilia_ and of Plato's _Dialogues_. There is a difference beyond a doubt, but there is also some difference in the reports in the Synoptics. Jesus for the most part spoke in Aramaic, sometimes in Greek, as to the great crowds from around Palestine (the Sermon on the Mount, for instance). There is the Logia of Jesus (Q of criticism) preserved in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke besides Mark, and the rest of Matthew and Luke. Certain natural individualities are preserved. The difference is greater in the Fourth Gospel, because John writes in the ripeness of age and in the richness of his long experience. He gives his reminiscences mellowed by long reflection and yet with rare dramatic power. The simplicity of the language leads many to think that they understand this Gospel when they fail to see the graphic pictures as in chapters strkjv@John:7-11|. The book fairly throbs with life. There is, no doubt, a Johannine style here, but curiously enough there exists in the Logia (Q) a genuine Johannine passage written long before the Fourth Gospel (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|). The use of "the Father" and "the Son" is thoroughly Johannine. It is clear that Jesus used the Johannine type of teaching also. Perhaps critics do not make enough allowance for the versatility and variety in Jesus.
rwp@John:1:21 @{And they asked him} (\kai rtsan auton\). Here the paratactic \kai\ is like the transitional \oun\ (then). {What then?} (\Ti oun;\). Argumentative \oun\ like Paul's \ti oun\ in strkjv@Romans:6:15|. _Quid ergo?_ {Art thou Elijah?} (\Su Elias ei;\). The next inevitable question since Elijah had been understood to be the forerunner of the Messiah from strkjv@Malachi:4:5|. In strkjv@Mark:9:11f.| Jesus will identify John with the Elijah of Malachi's prophecy. Why then does John here flatly deny it? Because the expectation was that Elijah would return in person. This John denies. Jesus only asserts that John was Elijah in spirit. Elijah in person they had just seen on the Mount of Transfiguration. {He saith} (\legei\). Vivid dramatic present. {I am not} (\ouk eimi\). Short and blunt denial. {Art thou the prophet?} (\ho prophts ei su;\). "The prophet art thou?" This question followed naturally the previous denials. Moses (Deuteronomy:18:15|) had spoken of a prophet like unto himself. Christians interpreted this prophet to be the Messiah (Acts:3:22; strkjv@7:37|), but the Jews thought him another forerunner of the Messiah (John:7:40|). It is not clear in strkjv@John:6:15| whether the people identified the expected prophet with the Messiah, though apparently so. Even the Baptist later became puzzled in prison whether Jesus himself was the true Messiah or just one of the forerunners (Luke:7:19|). People wondered about Jesus himself whether he was the Messiah or just one of the looked for prophets (Mark:8:28; strkjv@Matthew:16:14|). {And he answered} (\kai apekrith\). First aorist passive (deponent passive, sense of voice gone) indicative of \apokrinomai\, to give a decision from myself, to reply. {No} (\Ou\). Shortest possible denial.
rwp@John:1:38 @{Turned} (\strapheis\). Second aorist passive participle of \streph\, vividly picturing the sudden act of Jesus on hearing their steps behind him. {Beheld} (\theasamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ (verse 32|). Both participles here express antecedent action to \legei\ (saith). {Following} (\akolothountas\). Present active participle of \akolouthe\ (verse 37|). It was Christ's first experience of this kind and the two came from the Baptist to Jesus. {What seek ye?} (\Ti zteite;\). Not "whom" (\tina\ strkjv@18:4; strkjv@20:15|), but "what purpose have you." The first words of Jesus preserved in this Gospel. See strkjv@Luke:2:49; strkjv@Matthew:3:15| for words spoken before this and strkjv@Mark:1:15| for Mark's first report in the Galilean ministry. {Rabbi} (\Rabbei\). Aramaic title for "Teacher" which John here translates by \Didaskale\ as he is writing late and for general readers. Luke, a Greek Christian, does not use it, but John recalls his first use of this term to Jesus and explains it. Matthew has it only in the greeting of Judas to the Master (Matthew:26:25,49|) and Mark once by Judas (Mark:14:45|) and twice by Peter (Mark:9:5; strkjv@11:21|). John's Gospel has the disciples at first addressing Jesus by Rabbi while others address him by \Kurie\ (Lord or Sir) as in strkjv@4:11,49; strkjv@5:7|. Peter uses \Kurie\ in strkjv@6:68|. In the end the disciples usually say \Kurie\ (13:6,25|, etc.), but Mary Magdalene says \Rabbounei\ (20:16|). {Being interpreted} (\methermmeuomenon\). Present passive participle of \methermneu\, late compound of \meta\ and \hermneu\, to explain (John:1:42|), old word from \Hermes\, the god of speech (hermeneutics). John often explains Aramaic words (1:38,41,42; strkjv@4:25; strkjv@9:7|, etc.). {Where abidest thou?} (\Pou meneis;\). They wished a place for quiet converse with Jesus.
rwp@John:1:42 @{Looked upon him} (\emblepsas auti\). See verse 36| for same word and form of John's eager gaze at Jesus. Luke uses this word of Jesus when Peter denied him (Luke:22:61|). {He brought him} (\gagen auton\). Effective second aorist active indicative of \ago\ as if Andrew had to overcome some resistance on Simon's part. {Thou shalt be called Cephas} (\su klthsi Kphs\). Apparently before Simon spoke. We do not know whether Jesus had seen Simon before or not, but he at once gives him a nickname that will characterize him some day, though not yet, when he makes the noble confession (Matthew:16:17f.|), and Jesus will say, "Thou art Peter." Here the future passive indicative of \kale\ is only prophecy. The Aramaic \Cphs\ (rock) is only applied to Simon in John except by Paul (1Corinthians:1:12; strkjv@Galatians:1:18|, etc.). But the Greek \Petros\ is used by all. In the ancient Greek \petra\ was used for the massive ledge of rock like Stone Mountain while \petros\ was a detached fragment of the ledge, though itself large. This distinction may exist in strkjv@Matthew:16:17f.|, except that Jesus probably used Aramaic which would not have such a distinction.
rwp@John:2:11 @{This beginning of his signs did Jesus} (\tautn epoisen archn tn smein ho Isous\). Rather, "this Jesus did as a beginning of his signs," for there is no article between \tautn\ and \archn\. "We have now passed from the 'witness' of the Baptist to the 'witness' of the works of Jesus" (Bernard). This is John's favourite word "signs" rather than wonders (\terata\) or powers (\dunameis\) for the works (\erga\) of Jesus. \Smeion\ is an old word from \smain\, to give a sign (12:33|). He selects eight in his Gospel by which to prove the deity of Christ (20:30|) of which this is the first. {Manifested his glory} (\ephanersen tn doxan autou\). First aorist (effective) active indicative of \phanero\, that glory of which John spoke in strkjv@1:14|. {Believed on him} (\episteusan eis auton\). First aorist active indicative of \pisteu\, to believe, to put trust in, so common in John. These six disciples (learners) had already believed in Jesus as the Messiah (1:35-51|). Now their faith was greatly strengthened. Songs:it will be all through this Gospel. Jesus will increasingly reveal himself while the disciples will grow in knowledge and trust and the Jews will become increasingly hostile till the culmination.
rwp@John:2:22 @{When therefore he was raised from the dead} (\Hote oun gerth ek nekrn\). First aorist passive indicative of \egeir\, to raise up. And not at first then, but only slowly after the disciples themselves were convinced. Then "they believed the Scripture" (\episteusan ti graphi\). They "believed" again. Dative case \graphi\. Probably strkjv@Psalms:16:10| is meant (Acts:2:31; strkjv@13:35|). {And the word which Jesus had said} (\kai ti logi hon eipen\). Dative case \logi\ also, but \hon\ (relative) is not attracted to the dative. Clearly then John interprets Jesus to have a parabolic reference to his death and resurrection by his language in strkjv@2:19|. There are those who bluntly say that John was mistaken. I prefer to say that these scholars are mistaken. Even Bernard considers it "hardly possible" that John interprets Jesus rightly in strkjv@1:21|. "Had he meant that, He would have spoken with less ambiguity." But how do we know that Jesus wished to be understood clearly at this time? Certainly no one understood Christ when he spoke the words. The language of Jesus is recalled and perverted at his trial as "I will destroy" (Mark:14:58|), "I can destroy" (Matthew:26:61|), neither of which he said.
rwp@John:3:19 @{And this is the judgment} (\haut de estin h krisis\). A thoroughly Johannine phrase for sequence of thought (15:12; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:1:5; strkjv@5:11,14; strkjv@3John:1:6|). It is more precisely the process of judging (\kri-sis\) rather than the result (\kri-ma\) of the judgment. "It is no arbitrary sentence, but the working out of a moral law" (Bernard). {The light is come} (\to phs elluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\, a permanent result as already explained in the Prologue concerning the Incarnation (1:4,5,9,11|). Jesus is the Light of the world. {Loved darkness} (\gapsan to skotos\). Job:(Job:24:13|) spoke of men rebelling against the light. Here \to skotos\, common word for moral and spiritual darkness (1Thessalonians:5:5|), though \h skotia\ in strkjv@John:1:5|. "Darkness" is common in John as a metaphor for the state of sinners (8:12; strkjv@12:35, 46; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@2:8,9,11|). Jesus himself is the only moral and spiritual light of the world (8:12|) as he dared claim to his enemies. The pathos of it all is that men fall in love with the darkness of sin and rebel against the light like denizens of the underworld, "for their works were evil (\ponra\)." When the light appears, they scatter to their holes and dens. \Ponros\ (from \ponos\, toil, \pone\, to toil) is used of the deeds of the world by Jesus (7:7|). In the end the god of this world blinds men's eyes so that they do not see the light (2Corinthians:4:4|). The fish in the Mammoth Cave have no longer eyes, but only sockets where eyes used to be. The evil one has a powerful grip on the world (1John:5:19|).
rwp@John:4:35 @{Say not ye?} (\Ouch humeis legete;\). It is not possible to tell whether Jesus is alluding to a rural proverb of which nothing is known about there being four months from seedtime to harvest (a longer time than four months in fact) or whether he means that it was then actually four months to harvest. In the latter sense, since harvest began about the middle of April, it would be December when Jesus spoke. {There are yet four months} (\eti tetramnos estin\). The use of \eti\ (yet) and the fact that the space between seedtime and harvest is longer than four months (\tetra\, Aeolic for \tessara\, and \mn\, month) argue against the proverb idea. {And then cometh the harvest} (\kai ho therismos erchetai\). "And the harvest (\therismos\, from \theriz\, rare in Greek writers) comes." The possible Iambic verse here is purely accidental as in strkjv@5:14|. {Lift up your eyes} (\eparate tous ophthalmous humn\). First aorist active imperative of \epair\. Deliberate looking as in strkjv@John:6:5| where \theaomai\ also is used as here. {Fields} (\chras\). Cultivated or ploughed ground as in strkjv@Luke:21:21|. {White} (\leukai\). Ripened grain like grey hair (Matthew:5:36|). {Already unto harvest} (\pros therismon d\). Probably \d\ (already) goes with verse 36|. The Samaritans could already be seen approaching and they were the field "white for harvest." This is the meaning of Christ's parable. If it is the spring of the year and Christ can point to the ripened grain, the parable is all the plainer, but it is not dependent on this detail. Recall the parable of the sower in strkjv@Matthew:13|.
rwp@John:4:36 @{Already he that reapeth receiveth wages} (\d ho therizn misthon lambanei\). The spiritual harvester can gather his harvest without waiting four months. Jesus is reaping a harvest right now by the conversion of this woman. The labourer is worthy of his hire (Luke:10:7; strkjv@2Timothy:2:6|). John does not use \misthos\ (reward) again, but \karpos\ (15:2-16|), "fruit for life eternal" (cf. strkjv@4:14|). {That he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together} (\hina ho speirn homou chairi kai ho therizn\). Final use of \hina\ with present active subjunctive of \chair\, to rejoice, in the singular with \ho speirn\ (the sower) and to be repeated with \ho therizn\ (the reaper). The adverb \homou\ (together) elsewhere in N.T. only strkjv@20:4; strkjv@21:2; strkjv@Acts:2:1|. Usually considerable time passes between the sowing and the reaping as in verse 35|. Amos (Amos:9:13|) spoke of the time when "the ploughman shall overtake the reaper" and that has happened here with the joy of the harvest time (Isaiah:9:3|). Jesus the Sower and the disciples as the reapers are here rejoicing simultaneously.
rwp@John:6:27 @{Work not for} (\m ergazesthe\). Prohibition with \m\ and present middle imperative of \ergazomai\, old verb from \ergon\, work. {The meat} (\tn brsin\). The act of eating (Romans:14:17|), corrosion (Matthew:6:19|), the thing eaten as here (2Corinthians:9:10|). See on ¯John:4:32|. {Which perisheth} (\tn apollumenn\). Present middle participle of \apollumi\. They were already hungry again. {Unto eternal life} (\eis zn ainion\). Mystical metaphor quite beyond this crowd hungry only for more loaves and fishes. Bernard thinks that John has here put together various sayings of Christ to make one discourse, a gratuitous interpretation. {Will give} (\dsei\). Future active indicative of \didmi\. The outcome is still future and will be decided by their attitude towards the Son of man (verse 51|). {For him the Father, even God, hath sealed} (\touton gar ho patr esphragisen ho theos\). Literally, "For this one the Father sealed, God." First aorist active indicative of \sphragiz\, to seal. See elsewhere in strkjv@John:3:33| (attestation by man). Sealing by God is rare in N.T. (2Corinthians:1:22; strkjv@Ephesians:1:13; strkjv@4:30|). It is not clear to what item, if any single one, John refers when the Father set his seal of approval on the Son. It was done at his baptism when the Holy Spirit came upon him and the Father spoke to him. Cf. strkjv@5:37|.
rwp@John:6:63 @{That quickeneth} (\to zopoioun\). Articular present active participle of \zopoie\ for which see strkjv@5:21|. For the contrast between \pneuma\ (spirit) and \sarx\ (flesh) see already strkjv@3:6|. {The words} (\ta rmata\). Those in this discourse (I have just spoken, \lelalka\), for they are the words of God (3:34; strkjv@8:47; strkjv@17:8|). No wonder they "are spirit and are life" (\pneuma estin kai z estin\). The breath of God and the life of God is in these words of Jesus. Never man spoke like Jesus (7:46|). There is life in his words today.
rwp@John:6:68 @{Lord, to whom shall we go?} (\Kurie, pros tina apeleusometha;\). Peter is the spokesman as usual and his words mean that, if such a thought as desertion crossed their minds when the crowd left, they dismissed it instantly. They had made their choice. They accepted these very words of Jesus that had caused the defection as "the words of eternal life."
rwp@John:8:14 @{Even if} (\kan\). That is \kai ean\, a condition of the third class with the present active subjunctive \martur\. Jesus means that his own witness concerning himself is true (\althes\) even if it contravenes their technical rules of evidence. He can and does tell the truth all by himself concerning himself. {For I know whence I came and whither I go} (\hoti oida pothen lthon kai pou hupag\). In this terse sentence with two indirect questions Jesus alludes to his pre-existence with the Father before his Incarnation as in strkjv@17:5| and to the return to the Father after the death and resurrection as in strkjv@13:3; strkjv@14:2f|. He again puts both ideas together in one crisp clause in strkjv@16:28| for the apostles who profess to understand him then. But here these Pharisees are blind to the words of Jesus. "But ye know not whence I come nor whither I go" (\humeis de ouk oidate pothen erchomai pou hupag\). He had spoken of his heavenly destiny (7:33|). Jesus alone knew his personal consciousness of his coming from, fellowship with, and return to the Father. Stier (_Words of the Lord Jesus_) argues that one might as well say to the sun, if claiming to be the sun, that it was night, because it bore witness of itself. The answer is the shining of the sun.
rwp@John:11:13 @{Had spoken} (\eirkei\). Past perfect of \eipon\ (\er\). The disciples had misunderstood Christ's metaphor for death. {That he spake} (\hoti legei\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse after the secondary tense (\edoxan\). {Of taking rest in sleep} (\peri ts koimses tou hupou\). Only use of \koimsis\ (from \koima\) in the N.T., but it also was used of death (Sirach strkjv@46:19). \Hupnou\ (in sleep) is objective genitive of \hupnos\ (sleep, strkjv@Matthew:1:24|).
rwp@John:11:27 @{Yea, Lord} (\Nai, kurie\). Martha probably did not understand all that Jesus said and meant, but she did believe in the future resurrection, in eternal life for believers in Christ, in the power of Christ to raise even the dead here and now. She had heroic faith and makes now her own confession of faith in words that outrank those of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:16| because she makes hers with her brother dead now four days and with the hope that Jesus will raise him up now. {I have believed} (\pepisteuka\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu\. It is my settled and firm faith. Peter uses this same tense in strkjv@6:69|. {That thou art the Son of God} (\hoti su ei ho Christos ho huios tou theou\). The Messiah or the Christ (1:41|) was to be also "the Son of God" as the Baptist said he had found Jesus to be (1:34|), as Peter confessed on Hermon for the apostles (Matthew:16:16|), as Jesus claimed to be (John:11:41|) and confessed on oath before Caiaphas that he was (Matthew:26:63f.|), and as John stated that it was his purpose to prove in his Gospel (20:31|). But no one said it under more trying circumstances than Martha. {Even he that cometh into the world} (\ho eis ton kosmon erchomenos\). No "even" in the Greek. This was a popular way of putting the people's expectation (6:14; strkjv@Matthew:11:3|). Jesus himself spoke of his coming into the world (9:39; strkjv@16:28; strkjv@8:37|).
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:12:25 @{Loseth it} (\apolluei autn\). The second paradox. Present active indicative of \apollu\. This great saying was spoken at various times as in strkjv@Mark:8:35| (Matthew:16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24|) and strkjv@Mark:10:39| (Luke:17:33|). See those passages for discussion of \psuch\ (life or soul). For "he that hateth his life" (\ho misn tn psuchn autou\) see the sharp contrasts in Luke strkjv@14:26-35| where \mise\ is used of father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, as well as one's own life. Clearly \mise\ means "hate" when the issue is between Christ and the dearest things of life as happens when the choice is between martyrdom and apostasy. In that case one keeps his soul for eternal life by losing his life (\psuch\, each time) here. That is the way to "guard" (\phulaxei\) life by being true to Christ. This is the second paradox to show Christ's philosophy of life.
rwp@John:12:29 @{That it had thundered} (\brontn gegonenai\). Perfect active infinitive of \ginomai\ in indirect discourse after \elegen\ and the accusative of general reference (\brontn\, thunder, as in strkjv@Mark:3:17|), "that thunder came to pass." Songs:the crowd "standing by" (\hests\, second perfect active participle of \histmi\), but Jesus understood his Father's voice. {An angel hath spoken to him} (\Aggelos auti lelalken\). Perfect active indicative of \lale\. So, when Jesus spoke to Saul on the way to Damascus, those with Saul heard the voice, but did not understand (Acts:9:7; strkjv@22:9|).
rwp@John:13:6 @{Songs:he cometh} (\erchetai oun\). Transitional use of \oun\ and dramatic present again (\erchetai\). {Lord, dost thou wash my feet?} (\Kurie, su mou nipteis tous podas;\). Emphatic contrast in position of \su mou\ (away from \podas\), "Dost thou my feet wash?" "Peter, we may suppose, drew his feet up, as he spoke, in his impulsive humility" (Bernard).
rwp@John:14:5 @{Whither} (\pou\)--{how} (\ps\). It is Thomas, not Peter (13:36f.|) who renews the doubt about the destination of Jesus including the path or way thither (\tn hodon\). Thomas is the spokesman for the materialistic conception then and now.
rwp@John:14:6 @{I am the way, and the truth, and the life} (\Eg eimi h hodos kai h altheia kai h z\). Either of these statements is profound enough to stagger any one, but here all three together overwhelm Thomas. Jesus had called himself "the life" to Martha (11:25|) and "the door" to the Pharisees (10:7|) and "the light of the world" (8:12|). He spoke "the way of God in truth" (Mark:12:14|). He is the way to God and the only way (verse 6|), the personification of truth, the centre of life. {Except by me} (\ei m di' emou\). There is no use for the Christian to wince at these words of Jesus. If he is really the Incarnate Son of God (1:1,14,18|, they are necessarily true.
rwp@John:14:25 @{Have I spoken} (\lelalka\). Perfect active indicative of \lale\, for permanent keeping (\tre\ verse 23|). {While yet abiding with you} (\par' humin menn\). Present active participle, no "yet" (\eti\) in the Greek, "while remaining beside (\par'\) you" before departing for the coming of the other Paraclete.
rwp@John:17:5 @{With thine own self} (\para seauti\). "By the side of thyself." Jesus prays for full restoration to the pre-incarnate glory and fellowship (cf. strkjv@1:1|) enjoyed before the Incarnation (John:1:14|). This is not just ideal pre-existence, but actual and conscious existence at the Father's side (\para soi\, with thee) "which I had" (\hi eichon\, imperfect active of \ech\, I used to have, with attraction of case of \hn\ to \hi\ because of \doxi\), "before the world was" (\pro tou ton kosmon einai\), "before the being as to the world" (cf. verse 24|). It is small wonder that those who deny or reject the deity of Jesus Christ have trouble with the Johannine authorship of this book and with the genuineness of these words. But even Harnack admits that the words here and in verse 24| are "undoubtedly the reflection of the certainty with which Jesus himself spoke" (_What Is Christianity_, Engl. Tr., p. 132). But Paul, as clearly as John, believes in the actual pre-existence and deity of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:2:5-11|).
rwp@John:18:23 @{If I have spoken evil} (\ei kaks elalsa\). Condition of first class (assumed to be true), with \ei\ and aorist active indicative. Jesus had not spoken evilly towards Annas, though he did not here turn the other cheek, one may note. For the sake of argument, Jesus puts it as if he did speak evilly. Then prove it, that is all. {Bear witness of the evil} (\marturson peri tou kakou\). First aorist active imperative of \marture\, to testify. This is the conclusion (apodosis). Jesus is clearly entitled to proof of such a charge if there is any. {But if well} (\ei de kals\). Supply the same verb \elalsa\. The same condition, but with a challenging question as the apodosis. {Smitest} (\dereis\). Old verb \der\, to flay, to skin, to beat, as in strkjv@Matthew:21:35; strkjv@Luke:22:63; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:20| (of an insulting blow in the face as here).
rwp@John:19:25 @{Were standing by the cross of Jesus} (\histkeisan para ti stauri tou Isou\). Perfect of \histmi\, to place, used as imperfect (intransitive) with \para\ (beside) and the locative case. Vivid contrast this to the rude gambling of the soldiers. This group of four (or three) women interests us more. Matt. (Matthew:27:55f.|) spoke of women beholding from afar and names three (Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee). Mark also (Mark:15:40|) names three (Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome). They have clearly drawn near the Cross by now. John alone mentions the mother of Jesus in the group. It is not clear whether the sister of the mother of Jesus is Salome the mother of the sons of Zebedee or the wife of Clopas. If so, two sisters have the name Mary and James and John are cousins of Jesus. The point cannot be settled with our present knowledge.
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@Luke:2:34 @{Is set for the falling and the rising up of many in Israel} (\Keitai eis ptsin kai anastasin polln en ti Isral\). Present indicative of the old defective verb appearing only in present and imperfect in the N.T. Sometimes it is used as the passive of \tithmi\ as here. The falling of some and the rising up of others is what is meant. He will be a stumbling-block to some (Isaiah:8:14; strkjv@Matthew:21:42,44; strkjv@Romans:9:33; strkjv@1Peter:2:16f.|) who love darkness rather than light (John:3:19|), he will be the cause of rising for others (Romans:6:4,9; strkjv@Ephesians:2:6|). "Judas despairs, Peter repents: one robber blasphemes, the other confesses" (Plummer). Jesus is the magnet of the ages. He draws some, he repels others. This is true of all epoch-making men to some extent. {Spoken against} (\antilegomenon\). Present passive participle, continuous action. It is going on today. Nietzsche regarded Jesus Christ as the curse of the race because he spared the weak.
rwp@Luke:2:35 @{A sword} (\rhomphaia\). A large sword, properly a long Thracian javelin. It occurs in the LXX of Goliath's sword (1Samuel:17:51|). How little Mary understood the meaning of Simeon's words that seemed so out of place in the midst of the glorious things already spoken, a sharp thorn in their roses, a veritable bitter-sweet. But one day Mary will stand by the Cross of Christ with this Thracian javelin clean through her soul, \stabat Mater Dolorosa\ (John:19:25|). It is only a parenthesis here, and a passing cloud perhaps passed over Mary's heart already puzzled with rapture and ecstasy. {May be revealed} (\apokaluphthsin\). Unveiled. First aorist passive subjunctive after \hops an\ and expresses God's purpose in the mission of the Messiah. He is to test men's thoughts (\dialogismoi\) and purposes. They will be compelled to take a stand for Christ or against him. That is true today.
rwp@Luke:4:21 @{And he began to say} (\rxato de legein\). Aorist ingressive active indicative and present infinitive. He began speaking. The moment of hushed expectancy was passed. These may or may not be the first words uttered here by Jesus. Often the first sentence is the crucial one in winning an audience. Certainly this is an arresting opening sentence. {Hath been fulfilled} (\peplrtai\). Perfect passive indicative, {stands fulfilled}. "Today this scripture (Isaiah:61:1,2|, just read) stands fulfilled in your ears." It was a most amazing statement and the people of Nazareth were quick to see the Messianic claim involved. Jesus could only mean that the real year of Jubilee had come, that the Messianic prophecy of Isaiah had come true today, and that in him they saw the Messiah of prophecy. There are critics today who deny that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. To be able to do that, they must reject the Gospel of John and all such passages as this one. And it is no apocalyptic eschatological Messiah whom Jesus here sets forth, but the one who forgives sin and binds up the broken-hearted. The words were too good to be true and to be spoken here at Nazareth by one of their own townsmen!
rwp@Luke:4:39 @{He stood over her} (\epistas epan auts\). Second aorist active participle. Only in Luke. Surely we are not to take Luke to mean that Jesus here took the exorcist's position and was rebuking a malignant personality. The attitude of Jesus is precisely that of any kindly sympathetic physician. strkjv@Mark:1:31; strkjv@Matthew:8:15| mention the touch of her hand rather than the tender look over her head. {Rebuked} (\epetimsen\). Only in Luke. Jesus bade the fever leave her as he spoke to the wind and the waves and Luke uses this same verb (8:24|). {Rose up and ministered} (\anastsa dikonei\). Second aorist active participle as in verse 38|, but inchoative imperfect tense \dikonei\, from \diakone\ (note augment of compound verb). She rose up immediately, though a long high fever usually leaves one very weak. The cure was instantaneous and complete. She began to minister at once and kept it up.
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:6:26 @{In the same manner did their fathers} (\ta auta epoioun hoi pateres autn\). Literally, their fathers did the same things to the false prophets. That is they spoke well (\kals\), finely of false prophets. Praise is sweet to the preacher but all sorts of preachers get it. {Of you} (\humas\). Accusative case after words of speaking according to regular Greek idiom, to speak one fair, to speak well of one.
rwp@Luke:7:37 @{A woman which was in the city, a sinner} (\gun htis en ti polei hamartlos\). Probably in Capernaum. The use of \htis\ means "Who was of such a character as to be" (cf. strkjv@8:3|) and so more than merely the relative \h\, who, that is, "who was a sinner in the city," a woman of the town, in other words, and known to be such. \Hamartlos\, from \hamartan\, to sin, means devoted to sin and uses the same form for feminine and masculine. It is false and unjust to Mary Magdalene, introduced as a new character in strkjv@Luke:8:2|, to identify this woman with her. Luke would have no motive in concealing her name here and the life of a courtesan would be incompatible with the sevenfold possession of demons. Still worse is it to identify this courtesan not only with Mary Magdalene, but also with Mary of Bethany simply because it is a Simon who gives there a feast to Jesus when Mary of Bethany does a beautiful deed somewhat like this one here (Mark:14:3-9; strkjv@Matthew:26:6-13; strkjv@John:12:2-8|). Certainly Luke knew full well the real character of Mary of Bethany (10:38-42|) so beautifully pictured by him. But a falsehood, once started, seems to have more lives than the cat's proverbial nine. The very name Magdalene has come to mean a repentant courtesan. But we can at least refuse to countenance such a slander on Mary Magdalene and on Mary of Bethany. This sinful woman had undoubtedly repented and changed her life and wished to show her gratitude to Jesus who had rescued her. Her bad reputation as a harlot clung to her and made her an unwelcome visitor in the Pharisee's house. {When she knew} (\epignousa\). Second aorist active participle from \epiginsk\, to know fully, to recognize. She came in by a curious custom of the time that allowed strangers to enter a house uninvited at a feast, especially beggars seeking a gift. This woman was an intruder whereas Mary of Bethany was an invited guest. "Many came in and took their places on the side seats, uninvited and yet unchallenged. They spoke to those at table on business or the news of the day, and our host spoke freely to them" (Trench in his _Parables_, describing a dinner at a Consul's house at Damietta). {He was sitting at meat} (\katakeitai\). Literally, he is reclining (present tense retained in indirect discourse in Greek). {An alabaster cruse of ointment} (\alabastron murou\). See on ¯Matthew:26:7| for discussion of \alabastron\ and \murou\.
rwp@Luke:8:23 @{He fell asleep} (\aphupnsen\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \aphupno\, to put to sleep, to fall off to sleep, a late verb for which the older Greek used \kathupno\. Originally \aphupno\ meant to waken from sleep, then to fall off to sleep (possibly a medical use). This is the only passage which speaks of the sleep of Jesus. Here only in the N.T. {Came down} (\kateb\). Second aorist active indicative of \katabain\, common verb. It was literally true. These wind storms (\lailaps\. Songs:also strkjv@Mark:4:37|) rushed from Hermon down through the Jordan gorge upon the Sea of Galilee and shook it like a tempest (Matthew:8:24|). Mark's (Mark:4:37|) vivid use of the dramatic present \ginetai\ (ariseth) is not so precise as Luke's "came down." See on ¯Matthew:8:24|. These sudden squalls were dangerous on this small lake. {They were filling} (\suneplrounto\). Imperfect passive. It was the boat that was being filled (Mark:4:37|) and it is here applied to the navigators as sailors sometimes spoke. An old verb, but in the N.T. used only by Luke (8:23; strkjv@9:51; strkjv@Acts:2:1|). {Were in jeopardy} (\ekinduneuon\). Imperfect active, vivid description. Old verb, but in the N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:19:27; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:30|.
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:9:48 @{This little child} (\touto to paidion\). As Jesus spoke he probably had his hand upon the head of the child. strkjv@Matthew:18:5| has "one such little child." The honoured disciple, Jesus holds, is the one who welcomes little children "in my name" (\epi ti onomati mou\), upon the basis of my name and my authority. It was a home-thrust against the selfish ambition of the Twelve. Ministry to children is a mark of greatness. Have preachers ever yet learned how to win children to Christ? They are allowed to slip away from home, from Sunday school, from church, from Christ. {For he that is least among you all} (\ho gar mikroteros en pasin humin huparchn\). Note the use of \huparch\ as in strkjv@8:41; strkjv@23:50|. The comparative \mikroteros\ is in accord with the _Koin_ idiom where the superlative is vanishing (nearly gone in modern Greek). But {great} (\megas\) is positive and very strong. This saying peculiar to Luke here.
rwp@Luke:10:5 @{First say} (\prton legete\). Say first. The adverb \prton\ can be construed with "enter" (\eiselthte\), but probably with \legete\ is right. The word spoken is the usual oriental salutation.
rwp@Luke:10:6 @{A son of peace} (\huios eirns\). A Hebraism, though some examples occur in the vernacular _Koin_ papyri. It means one inclined to peace, describing the head of the household. {Shall rest} (\epanapasetai\). Second future passive of \epanapau\, a late double compound (\epi, ana\) of the common verb \pau\. {It shall turn to you again} (\eph' hums anakampsei\). Common verb \anakampt\, to bend back, return. The peace in that case will bend back with blessing upon the one who spoke it.
rwp@Luke:10:23 @{Turning to the disciples} (\strapheis pros tous mathtas\). Second aorist passive of \streph\ as in strkjv@9:55|. The prayer was a soliloquy though uttered in the presence of the Seventy on their return. Now Jesus turned and spoke "privately" or to the disciples (the Twelve, apparently), whether on this same occasion or a bit later. {Blessed} (\makarioi\). A beatitude, the same adjective as in strkjv@Matthew:5:3-11|. A beatitude of privilege very much like that in strkjv@Matthew:5:13-16|. Jesus often repeated his sayings.
rwp@Luke:11:37 @{Now as he spake} (\en de ti lalsai\). Luke's common idiom, \en\ with the articular infinitive (aorist active infinitive) but it does not mean "after he had spoken" as Plummer argues, but simply "in the speaking," no time in the aorist infinitive. See strkjv@3:21| for similar use of aorist infinitive with \en\. {Asketh} (\erti\). Present active indicative, dramatic present. Request, not question. {To dine} (\hops aristsi\). Note \hops\ rather than the common \hina\. Aorist active subjunctive rather than present, for a single meal. The verb is from \ariston\ (breakfast). See distinction between \ariston\ and \deipnon\ (dinner or supper) in strkjv@Luke:14:12|. It is the morning meal (breakfast or lunch) after the return from morning prayers in the synagogue (Matthew:22:4|), not the very early meal called \akratisma\. The verb is, however, used for the early meal on the seashore in strkjv@John:21:12,15|. {With him} (\par' auti\). By his side. {Sat down to meat} (\anepesen\). Second aorist active indicative of \anapipt\, old verb, to recline, to fall back on the sofa or lounge. No word here for "to meat."
rwp@Luke:12:2 @{Covered up} (\sugkekalummenon estin\). Periphrastic perfect passive indicative of \sugkalupt\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T., to cover up on all sides and so completely. Verses 2-9| here are parallel with strkjv@Matthew:10:26-33| spoken to the Twelve on their tour of Galilee, illustrating again how often Jesus repeated his sayings unless we prefer to say that he never did so and that the Gospels have hopelessly jumbled them as to time and place. See the passage in Matthew for discussion of details.
rwp@Luke:12:10 @{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:12:22 @{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:12:41 @{Peter said} (\Eipen de ho Petros\). This whole paragraph from verse 22-40| had been addressed directly to the disciples. Hence it is not surprising to find Peter putting in a question. This incident confirms also the impression that Luke is giving actual historical data in the environment of these discourses. He is certain that the Twelve are meant, but he desires to know if others are included, for he had spoken to the multitude in verses 13-21|. Recall strkjv@Mark:13:37|. This interruption is somewhat like that on the Mount of Transfiguration (Luke:9:33|) and is characteristic of Peter. Was it the magnificent promise in verse 37| that stirred Peter's impulsiveness? It is certainly more than a literary device of Luke. Peter's question draws out a parabolic reply by Jesus (42-48|).
rwp@Luke:13:34 @{O Jerusalem, Jerusalem} (\Ierousalm, Ierousalm\). In strkjv@Matthew:23:37f.| Jesus utters a similar lament over Jerusalem. The connection suits both there and here, but Plummer considers it "rather a violent hypothesis" to suppose that Jesus spoke these words twice. It is possible, of course, though not like Luke's usual method, that he put the words here because of the mention of Jerusalem. In itself it is not easy to see why Jesus could not have made the lament both here and in Jerusalem. The language of the apostrophe is almost identical in both places (Luke:13:34f.; strkjv@Matthew:23:37-39|). For details see on Matthew. In Luke we have \episunaxai\ (late first aorist active infinitive) and in Matthew \episunagagein\ (second aorist active infinitive), both from \episunag\, a double compound of late Greek (Polybius). Both have "How often would I" (\posakis thelsa\). How often did I wish. Clearly showing that Jesus made repeated visits to Jerusalem as we know otherwise only from John's Gospel. {Even as} (\hon tropon\). Accusative of general reference and in strkjv@Matthew:23:37| also. Incorporation of antecedent into the relative clause. {Brood} (\nossian\) is in Luke while Matthew has {chickens} (\nossia\), both late forms for the older \neossia\. The adjective {desolate} (\ermos\) is wanting in strkjv@Luke:13:35| and is doubtful in strkjv@Matthew:23:39|.
rwp@Luke:15:2 @{Both... and} (\te... kai\). United in the complaint. {Murmured} (\diegogguzon\). Imperfect active of \diagogguz\, late Greek compound in the LXX and Byzantine writers. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:19:7|. The force of \dia\ here is probably between or among themselves. It spread (imperfect tense) whenever these two classes came in contact with Jesus. As the publicans and the sinners were drawing near to Jesus just in that proportion the Pharisees and the scribes increased their murmurings. The social breach is here an open yawning chasm. {This man} (\houtos\). A contemptuous sneer in the use of the pronoun. They spoke out openly and probably pointed at Jesus. {Receiveth} (\prosdechetai\). Present middle indicative of the common verb \prosdechomai\. In strkjv@12:36| we had it for expecting, here it is to give access to oneself, to welcome like \hupedexato\ of Martha's welcome to Jesus (Luke:10:38|). The charge here is that this is the habit of Jesus. He shows no sense of social superiority to these outcasts (like the Hindu "untouchables" in India). {And eateth with them} (\kai sunesthiei autois\). Associative instrumental case (\autois\) after \sun-\ in composition. This is an old charge (Luke:5:30|) and a much more serious breach from the standpoint of the Pharisees. The implication is that Jesus prefers these outcasts to the respectable classes (the Pharisees and the scribes) because he is like them in character and tastes, even with the harlots. There was a sting in the charge that he was the "friend" (\philos\) of publicans and sinners (Luke:7:34|).
rwp@Luke:16:13 @{Servant} (\oikets\). Household (\oikos\) servant. This is the only addition to strkjv@Matthew:6:24| where otherwise the language is precisely the same, which see. Either Matthew or Luke has put the \logion\ in the wrong place or Jesus spoke it twice. It suits perfectly each context. There is no real reason for objecting to repetition of favourite sayings by Jesus.
rwp@Luke:16:14 @{Who were lovers of money} (\philarguroi huparchontes\). Literally, being lovers of money. \Philarguroi\ is an old word, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@2Timothy:3:2|. It is from \philos\ and \arguros\. {Heard} (\kouon\). Imperfect active, were listening (all the while Jesus was talking to the disciples (verses 1-13|). {And they scoffed at him} (\kai exemuktrizon\). Imperfect active again of \ekmuktriz\. LXX where late writers use simple verb. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:23:35|. It means to turn out or up the nose at one, to sneer, to scoff. The Romans had a phrase, _naso adunco suspendere_, to hang on the hooked nose (the subject of ridicule). These money-loving Pharisees were quick to see that the words of Jesus about the wise use of money applied to them. They had stood without comment the three parables aimed directly at them (the lost sheep, the lost coin, the lost son). But now they do not remain quiet while they hear the fourth parable spoken to the disciples. No words were apparently spoken, but their eyes, noses, faces were eloquent with a fine disdain.
rwp@Luke:17:21 @{Within you} (\entos humn\). This is the obvious, and, as I think, the necessary meaning of \entos\. The examples cited of the use of \entos\ in Xenophon and Plato where \entos\ means "among" do not bear that out when investigated. Field (_Ot. Norv_.) "contends that there is no clear instance of \entos\ in the sense of among" (Bruce), and rightly so. What Jesus says to the Pharisees is that they, as others, are to look for the kingdom of God within themselves, not in outward displays and supernatural manifestations. It is not a localized display "Here" or "There." It is in this sense that in strkjv@Luke:11:20| Jesus spoke of the kingdom of God as "come upon you" (\ephthasen eph' hums\), speaking to Pharisees. The only other instance of \entos\ in the N.T. (Matthew:23:26|) necessarily means "within" ("the inside of the cup"). There is, beside, the use of \entos\ meaning "within" in the Oxyrhynchus Papyrus saying of Jesus of the Third Century (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 426) which is interesting: "The kingdom of heaven is within you" (\entos humn\ as here in strkjv@Luke:17:21|).
rwp@Luke:21:20 @{Compassed with armies} (\kukloumenn hupo stratopedn\). Present passive participle of \kuklo\, to circle, encircle, from \kuklos\, circle. Old verb, but only four times in N.T. The point of this warning is the present tense, being encircled. It will be too late after the city is surrounded. It is objected by some that Jesus, not to say Luke, could not have spoken (or written) these words before the Roman armies came. One may ask why not, if such a thing as predictive prophecy can exist and especially in the case of the Lord Jesus. The word \stratopedn\ (\stratos\, army, \pedon\, plain) is a military camp and then an army in camp. Old word, but only here in the N.T. {Then know} (\tote gnte\). Second aorist active imperative of \ginsk\. Christians did flee from Jerusalem to Pella before it was too late as directed in strkjv@Luke:21:21; strkjv@Mark:13:14f.; strkjv@Matthew:24:16f|.
rwp@Luke:23:34 @{Father forgive them} (\Pater, aphes autois\). Second aorist active imperative of \aphimi\, with dative case. Some of the oldest and best documents do not contain this verse, and yet, while it is not certain that it is a part of Luke's Gospel, it is certain that Jesus spoke these words, for they are utterly unlike any one else. Jesus evidently is praying for the Roman soldiers, who were only obeying, but not for the Sanhedrin. {Cast lots} (\ebalon klron\). Second aorist active indicative of \ball\. See strkjv@Mark:15:24; strkjv@Matthew:27:35|. strkjv@John:19:23f|. shows how the lot was cast for the seamless garment, the four soldiers dividing the other garments.
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:2:6 @{Sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts} (\ekei kathmenoi kai dialogizomenoi en tais kardiais autn\). Another of Mark's pictures through Peter's eyes. These scribes (and Pharisees, strkjv@Luke:5:21|) were there to cause trouble, to pick flaws in the teaching and conduct of Jesus. His popularity and power had aroused their jealousy. There is no evidence that they spoke aloud the murmur in their hearts, "within themselves" (Matthew:9:3|). It was not necessary, for their looks gave them away and Jesus knew their thoughts (Matthew:9:4|) and perceived their reasoning (Luke:5:22|). {Instantly Jesus recognized it in his own spirit} (\euthus epignous ho Isous ti pneumati autou\, strkjv@Mark:2:8|). The Master at once recognizes the hostile atmosphere in the house. The debate (\dialogizomenoi\) in their hearts was written on their faces. No sound had come, but feeling did.
rwp@Mark:2:7 @{He blasphemeth} (\blasphmei\). This is the unspoken charge in their hearts which Jesus read like an open book. The correct text here has this verb. They justify the charge with the conviction that God alone has the power (\dunatai\) to forgive sins. The word \blasphme\ means injurious speech or slander. It was, they held, blasphemy for Jesus to assume this divine prerogative. Their logic was correct. The only flaw in it was the possibility that Jesus held a peculiar relation to God which justified his claim. Songs:the two forces clash here as now on the deity of Christ Jesus. Knowing full well that he had exercised the prerogative of God in forgiving the man's sins he proceeds to justify his claim by healing the man.
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:4:39 @{Rebuked the wind} (\epetimsen ti anemi\) as in strkjv@Matthew:8:26| and strkjv@Luke:8:24|. He spoke to the sea also. All three Gospels speak of the sudden calm (\galn\) and the rebuke to the disciples for this lack of faith.
rwp@Mark:5:36 @{Not heeding} (\parakousas\). This is the sense in strkjv@Matthew:18:17| and uniformly so in the LXX. But here the other sense of hearing aside, overhearing what was not spoken directly to him, probably exists also. "Jesus might overhear what was said and disregard its import" (Bruce). Certainly he ignored the conclusion of the messengers. The present participle \laloumenon\ suits best the idea of overhearing. Both Mark and strkjv@Luke:8:50| have "Fear not, only believe" (\m phobou, monon pisteue\). This to the ruler of the synagogue (\ti archisunaggi\) who had remained and to whom the messenger had spoken.
rwp@Mark:5:39 @{Make a tumult} (\thorubeisthe\). Middle voice. Jesus had dismissed one crowd (verse 37|), but finds the house occupied by the hired mourners making bedlam (\thorubos\) as if that showed grief with their ostentatious noise. strkjv@Matthew:9:23| spoke of flute-players (\aultas\) and the hubbub of the excited throng (\thoruboumenon\. Cf. strkjv@Mark:14:2; strkjv@Acts:20:1,21,34|). Mark, Matthew, and Luke all quote Jesus as saying that "the child is not dead, but sleepeth." Jesus undoubtedly meant that she was not dead to stay dead, though some hold that the child was not really dead. It is a beautiful word (she is {sleeping}, \katheudei\) that Jesus uses of death.
rwp@Mark:5:41 @{Talitha cumi}. These precious Aramaic words, spoken by Jesus to the child, Peter heard and remembered so that Mark gives them to us. Mark interprets the simple words into Greek for those who did not know Aramaic (\to korasion, egeire\), that is, {Damsel, arise}. Mark uses the diminutive \korasin\, a little girl, from \kor\, girl. _Braid Scots_ has it: "Lassie, wauken." strkjv@Luke:8:5-9| has it \H pais, egeire\, {Maiden, arise}. All three Gospels mention the fact that Jesus took her by the hand, a touch of life (\kratsas ts cheiros\), giving confidence and help.
rwp@Mark:6:2 @{Began to teach} (\rxato didaskein\). As was now his custom in the synagogue on the sabbath. The ruler of the synagogue (\archisunaggos\, see strkjv@Matthew:5:22|) would ask some one to speak whensoever he wished. The reputation of Jesus all over Galilee opened the door for him. Jesus may have gone to Nazareth for rest, but could not resist this opportunity for service. {Whence hath this man these things?} (\Pothen touti tauta;\). Laconic and curt, {Whence these things to this fellow?} With a sting and a fling in their words as the sequel shows. They continued to be amazed (\exeplssonto\, imperfect tense passive). They challenge both the apparent {wisdom} (\sophia\) with which he spoke and {the mighty works} or powers (\hai dunameis\) {such as those} (\toiautai\) {coming to pass} (\ginomenai\, present middle participle, repeatedly wrought) {by his hands} (\dia tn cheirn\). They felt that there was some hocus-pocus about it somehow and somewhere. They do not deny the wisdom of his words, nor the wonder of his works, but the townsmen knew Jesus and they had never suspected that he possessed such gifts and graces.
rwp@Mark:6:24 @{What shall I ask?} (\Ti aitsmai;\). The fact that she went and spoke to her mother proves that she had not been told beforehand what to ask. strkjv@Matthew:14:8| does not necessarily mean that, but he simply condenses the account. The girl's question implies by the middle voice that she is thinking of something for herself. She was no doubt unprepared for her mother's ghastly reply.
rwp@Mark:7:17 @{When he was entered into the house from the multitude} (\hote eislthen eis oikon apo tou ochlou\). This detail in Mark alone, probably in Peter's house in Capernaum. To the crowd Jesus spoke the parable of corban, but the disciples want it interpreted (cf. strkjv@4:10ff.,33ff.|). strkjv@Matthew:15:15| represents Peter as the spokesman as was usually the case.
rwp@Mark:7:34 @{Ephphatha} (\dianoichthti\, be opened). Another one of Mark's Aramaic words preserved and transliterated and then translated into Greek. "Be thou unbarred" (_Braid Scots_). Jesus sighed (\estenaxen\) as he looked up into heaven and spoke the word \ephphatha\. Somehow he felt a nervous strain in this complex case (deaf, dumb, demoniac) that we may not quite comprehend.
rwp@Mark:9:6 @{For he wist not what to answer} (\ou gar idei ti apokrithi\). Deliberative subjunctive retained in indirect question. But why did Peter say anything? Luke says that he spoke, "not knowing what he said," as an excuse for the inappropriateness of his remarks. Perhaps Peter felt embarrassed at having been asleep (Luke:9:32|) and the feast of tabernacles or booths (\sknai\) was near. See on ¯Matthew:17:4|. Peter and the others apparently had not heard the talk of Moses and Elijah with Jesus about his decease (\exodon\, exodus, departure) and little knew the special comfort that Jesus had found in this understanding of the great approaching tragedy concerning which Peter had shown absolute stupidity (Mark:8:32f.|) so recently. See on ¯Matthew:17:5| about the overshadowing and the voice.
rwp@Mark:9:32 @{But they understood not the saying} (\hoi de gnooun to rhma\). An old word. Chiefly in Paul's Epistles in the N.T. Imperfect tense. They continued not to understand. They were agnostics on the subject of the death and resurrection even after the Transfiguration experience. As they came down from the mountain they were puzzled again over the Master's allusion to his resurrection (Mark:9:10|). strkjv@Matthew:17:23| notes that "they were exceeding sorry" to hear Jesus talk this way again, but Mark adds that they "were afraid to ask him" (\ephobounto auton epertsai\). Continued to be afraid (imperfect tense), perhaps with a bitter memory of the term "Satan" hurled at Peter when he protested the other time when Jesus spoke of his death (Mark:8:33; strkjv@Matthew:16:23|). strkjv@Luke:9:45| explains that "it was concealed from them," probably partly by their own preconceived ideas and prejudices.
rwp@Mark:9:35 @{He sat down and called the twelve} (\kathisas ephnsen tous ddeka\). Deliberate action of Jesus to handle this delicate situation. Jesus gives them the rule of greatness: "If any man would be first (\prtos\) he shall be last (\eschatos\) of all, and minister (\diakonos\) of all." This saying of Christ, like many others, he repeated at other times (Mark:10:43f.; strkjv@Matthew:23:8ff.; strkjv@Luke:22:24f.|). strkjv@Matthew:18:2| says that he called a little child, one there in the house, perhaps Peter's child. strkjv@Luke:9:47| notes that he "set him by his side." Then Jesus {taking him in his arms} (\enagkalisamenos\, aorist middle participle, late Greek word from \agkal\ as in strkjv@Luke:2:28|) spoke again to the disciples.
rwp@Mark:10:2 @{Tempting him} (\peirazontes\). As soon as Jesus appears in Galilee the Pharisees attack him again (cf. strkjv@7:5; strkjv@8:11|). Gould thinks that this is a test, not a temptation. The word means either (see on ¯Matthew:4:1|), but their motive was evil. They had once involved the Baptist with Herod Antipas and Herodias on this subject. They may have some such hopes about Jesus, or their purpose may have been to see if Jesus will be stricter than Moses taught. They knew that he had already spoken in Galilee on the subject (Matthew:5:31f.|).
rwp@Mark:10:35 @{There come near unto him James and John} (\kai prosporeuontai Iakbos kai Ians\). Dramatic present tense. Matthew has \tote\, then, showing that the request of the two brothers with their mother (Matthew:20:20|) comes immediately after the talk about Christ's death. {We would} (\thelomen\). We wish, we want, bluntly told. {She came worshipping} (\proskunousa\) Matthew says. The mother spoke for the sons. But they try to commit Jesus to their desires before they tell what they are, just like spoiled children.
rwp@Mark:10:39 @See on ¯Matthew:20:23-28| for discussion on these memorable verses (39-45|) identical in both Matthew and Mark. In particular in verse 45| note the language of Jesus concerning his death as "a ransom for many" (\lutron anti polln\), words of the Master that were not understood by the apostles when spoken by Jesus and which have been preserved for us by Peter through Mark. Some today seek to empty these words of all real meaning as if Jesus could not have or hold such a conception concerning his death for sinners.
rwp@Mark:11:14 @{No man eat fruit from thee henceforward forever} (\Mketi eis ton aina ek sou mdeis karpon phagoi\). The verb \phagoi\ is in the second aorist active optative. It is a wish for the future that in its negative form constitutes a curse upon the tree. strkjv@Matthew:21:19| has the aorist subjunctive with double negative \ou mketi gentai\, a very strong negative prediction that amounts to a prohibition. See on Matthew. Jesus probably spoke in the Aramaic on this occasion. {And his disciples heard it} (\kai kouon hoi mathtai autou\). Imperfect tense, "were listening to it," and evidently in amazement, for, after all, it was not the fault of the poor fig tree that it had put out leaves. One often sees peach blossoms nipped by the frost when they are too precocious in the changeable weather. But Jesus offered no explanation at this time.
rwp@Mark:12:28 @{Heard them questioning together} (\akousas autn sunztountn\). The victory of Christ over the Sadducees pleased the Pharisees who now had come back with mixed emotions over the new turn of things (Matthew:22:34|). strkjv@Luke:20:39| represents one of the scribes as commending Jesus for his skilful reply to the Sadducees. Mark here puts this scribe in a favourable light, "knowing that he had answered them well" (\eids hoti kals apekrith autois\). "Them" here means the Sadducees. But strkjv@Matthew:22:35| says that this lawyer (\nomikos\) was "tempting" (\peirazn\) by his question. "A few, among whom was the scribe, were constrained to admire, even if they were willing to criticize, the Rabbi who though not himself a Pharisee, surpassed the Pharisees as a champion of the truth." That is a just picture of this lawyer. {The first of all} (\prt pantn\). First in rank and importance. strkjv@Matthew:22:36| has "great" (\megal\). See discussion there. Probably Jesus spoke in Aramaic. "First" and "great" in Greek do not differ essentially here. Mark quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:4f.| as it stands in the LXX and also strkjv@Leviticus:19:18|. strkjv@Matthew:22:40| adds the summary: "On these two commandments hangeth (\krematai\) the whole law and the prophets."
rwp@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@Mark:16:19 @{Was received up into heaven} (\anelmpth eis ton ouranon\). First aorist passive indicative. Luke gives the fact of the Ascension twice in Gospel (Luke:24:50f.|) and strkjv@Acts:1:9-11|. The Ascension in Mark took place after Jesus spoke to the disciples, not in Galilee (16:15-18|), nor on the first or second Sunday evening in Jerusalem. We should not know when it took place nor where but for Luke who locates it on Olivet (Luke:24:50|) at the close of the forty days (Acts:1:3|) and so after the return from Galilee (Matthew:28:16|). {Sat down at the right hand of God} (\ekathisen ek dexin tou theou\). Swete notes that the author "passes beyond the field of history into that of theology," an early and most cherished belief (Acts:7:55f.; strkjv@Romans:8:34; strkjv@Ephesians:1:20; strkjv@Colossians:3:1; strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@10:12; strkjv@12:2; strkjv@1Peter:3:22; strkjv@Revelation:3:21|).
rwp@Matthew:1:22 @{That it may be fulfilled} (\hina plrthi\). Alford says that "it is impossible to interpret \hina\ in any other sense than in order that." That was the old notion, but modern grammarians recognize the non-final use of this particle in the _Koin_ and even the consecutive like the Latin _ut_. Some even argue for a causal use. If the context called for result, one need not hesitate to say so as in strkjv@Mark:11:28; strkjv@John:9:36; strkjv@1John:1:9; strkjv@Revelation:9:20; strkjv@13:13|. See discussion in my _Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research_, pp. 997-9. All the same it is purpose here, God's purpose, Matthew reports the angel as saying, spoken "by (\hupo\, immediate agent) the Lord through (\dia\, intermediate agent) the prophet." {"All this has happened"} (\touto de holon gegonen\, present perfect indicative), stands on record as historical fact. But the Virgin Birth of Jesus is not due to this interpretation of strkjv@Isaiah:7:14|. It is not necessary to maintain (Broadus) that Isaiah himself saw anything more in his prophecy than that a woman then a virgin, would bear a son and that in the course of a few years Ahaz would be delivered from the king of Syria and Israel by the coming of the Assyrians. This historical illustration finds its richest fulfilment in the birth of Jesus from Mary. "Words of themselves are empty. They are useful only as vessels to convey things from mind to mind" (Morison). The Hebrew word for young woman is translated by virgin (\parthenos\), but it is not necessary to conclude that Isaiah himself contemplated the supernatural birth of Jesus. We do not have to say that the idea of the Virgin Birth of Jesus came from Jewish sources. Certainly it did not come from the pagan myths so foreign to this environment, atmosphere and spirit. It is far simpler to admit the supernatural fact than try to explain the invention of the idea as a myth to justify the deification of Jesus. The birth, life, and death of Jesus throw a flood of light on the Old Testament narrative and prophecies for the early Christians. In Matthew and John in particular we often see "that the events of Christ's life were divinely ordered for the express purpose of fulfilling the Old Testament" (McNeile). See strkjv@Matthew:2:15,23; strkjv@4:14-17; strkjv@8:17; strkjv@12:17-21; strkjv@13:25; strkjv@21:4f.; strkjv@John:12:38f.; strkjv@13:18; strkjv@19:24,28,36f|.
rwp@Matthew:2:23 @{Should be called a Nazarene} (\Nazraios klthsetai\). Matthew says "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets" (\dia tn prophtn\). It is the plural and no single prophecy exists which says that the Messiah was to be called a Nazarene. It may be that this term of contempt (John:1:46; strkjv@7:52|) is what is meant, and that several prophecies are to be combined like Ps. strkjv@22:6,8; strkjv@69:11,19; strkjv@Isaiah:53:2,3,4|. The name Nazareth means a shoot or branch, but it is by no means certain that Matthew has this in mind. It is best to confess that we do not know. See Broadus on Matthew for the various theories. But, despised as Nazareth was at that time, Jesus has exalted its fame. The lowly Nazarene he was at first, but it is our glory to be the followers of the Nazarene. Bruce says that "in this case, therefore, we certainly know that the historic fact suggested the prophetic reference, instead of the prophecy creating the history." The parallels drawn by Matthew between the history of Israel and the birth and infancy of Jesus are not mere fancy. History repeats itself and writers of history find frequent parallels. Surely Matthew is not beyond the bounds of reason or of fact in illustrating in his own way the birth and infancy of Jesus by the Providence of God in the history of Israel.
rwp@Matthew:3:2 @{For this is he that was spoken of by Isaiah the prophet} (\houtos gar estin ho rhtheis dia Esaiou tou prophtou\). This is Matthew's way of interpreting the mission and message of the Baptist. He quotes strkjv@Isaiah:40:3| where "the prophet refers to the return of Israel from the exile, accompanied by their God" (McNeile). He applies it to the work of John as "a voice crying in the wilderness" for the people to make ready the way of the Lord who is now near. He was only a voice, but what a voice he was. He can be heard yet across the centuries.
rwp@Matthew:3:9 @{And think not to say within yourselves} (\kai m doxte legein en heautois\). John touched the tender spot, their ecclesiastical pride. They felt that the "merits of the fathers," especially of Abraham, were enough for all Israelites. At once John made clear that, reformer as he was, a breach existed between him and the religious leaders of the time. {Of these stones} (\ek tn lithn toutn\). "Pointing, as he spoke to the pebbles on the beach of the Jordan" (Vincent).
rwp@Matthew:5:1 @{He went up into the mountain} (\aneb eis to oros\). Not "a" mountain as the Authorized Version has it. The Greek article is poorly handled in most English versions. We do not know what mountain it was. It was the one there where Jesus and the crowds were. "Delitzsch calls the Mount of Beatitudes the Sinai of the New Testament" (Vincent). He apparently went up to get in closer contact with the disciples, "seeing the multitudes." Luke (Luke:6:12|) says that he went out into the mountain to pray, Mark (Mark:3:13|) that he went up and called the twelve. All three purposes are true. Luke adds that after a whole night in prayer and after the choice of the twelve Jesus came down to a level place on the mountain and spoke to the multitudes from Judea to Phoenicia. The crowds are great in both Matthew and in Luke and include disciples and the other crowds. There is no real difficulty in considering the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew and the Sermon on the Plain in Luke as one and the same. See full discussion in my _Harmony of the Gospels_.
rwp@Matthew:5:2 @{Taught them} (\edidasken\). Inchoative imperfect, began to teach. He sat down on the mountain side as the Jewish rabbis did instead of standing. It was a most impressive scene as Jesus opened his mouth wide and spoke loud enough for the great throng to hear him. The newly chosen twelve apostles were there, "a great number of disciples and a great number of the people" (Luke:6:17|).
rwp@Matthew:7:15 @{False prophets} (\tn pseudoprophtn\). There were false prophets in the time of the Old Testament prophets. Jesus will predict "false Messiahs and false prophets" (Matthew:24:24|) who will lead many astray. They came in due time posing as angels of light like Satan, Judaizers (2Corinthians:11:13ff|.) and Gnostics (1John:4:1; strkjv@1Timothy:4:1|). Already false prophets were on hand when Jesus spoke on this occasion (cf. strkjv@Acts:13:6; strkjv@2Peter:2:1|). In outward appearance they look like sheep in the sheep's clothing which they wear, but within they are "ravening wolves" (\lukoi harpages\), greedy for power, gain, self. It is a tragedy that such men and women reappear through the ages and always find victims. Wolves are more dangerous than dogs and hogs.
rwp@Matthew:7:29 @{And not as their scribes} (\kai ouch hs hoi grammateis autn\). They had heard many sermons before from the regular rabbis in the synagogues. We have specimens of these discourses preserved in the Mishna and Gemara, the Jewish Talmud when both were completed, the driest, dullest collection of disjounted comments upon every conceivable problem in the history of mankind. The scribes quoted the rabbis before them and were afraid to express an idea without bolstering it up by some predecessor. Jesus spoke with the authority of truth, the reality and freshness of the morning light, and the power of God's Spirit. This sermon which made such a profound impression ended with the tragedy of the fall of the house on the sand like the crash of a giant oak in the forest. There was no smoothing over the outcome.
rwp@Matthew:8:21 @{The Son of man} (\tho huios tou anthrpou\). This remarkable expression, applied to himself by Jesus so often, appears here for the first time. There is a considerable modern literature devoted to it. "It means much for the Speaker, who has chosen it deliberately, in connection with private reflections, at whose nature we can only guess, by study of the many occasions on which the name is used" (Bruce). Often it means the Representative Man. It may sometimes stand for the Aramaic _barnasha_, the man, but in most instances that idea will not suit. Jesus uses it as a concealed Messianic title. It is possible that this scribe would not understand the phrase at all. Bruce thinks that here Jesus means "the unprivileged Man," worse off than the foxes and the birds. Jesus spoke Greek as well as Aramaic. It is inconceivable that the Gospels should never call Jesus "the Son of man" and always credit it to him as his own words if he did not so term himself, about eighty times in all, thirty-three in Matthew. Jesus in his early ministry, except at the very start in strkjv@John:4|, abstains from calling himself Messiah. This term suited his purpose exactly to get the people used to his special claim as Messiah when he is ready to make it openly.
rwp@Matthew:8:27 @{Even the winds and the sea obey him} (\Kai hoi anmoi kai h thalassa auti hupakouousin\). A nature miracle. Even a sudden drop in the wind would not at once calm the sea. "J. Weiss explains that by 'an astonishing coincidence' the storm happened to lull at the moment that Jesus spoke!" (McNeile). Some minds are easily satisfied by their own stupidities.
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:9:9 @{At the place of toll} (\epi to telnion\). The tax-office or custom-house of Capernaum placed here to collect taxes from the boats going across the lake outside of Herod's territory or from people going from Damascus to the coast, a regular caravan route. "{Called Matthew}" (\Maththaion legomenon\) and in strkjv@10:3| Matthew the publican is named as one of the Twelve Apostles. Mark (Mark:2:14|) and Luke (Luke:5:27|) call this man Levi. He had two names as was common, Matthew Levi. The publicans (\telnai\) get their name in English from the Latin _publicanus_ (a man who did public duty), not a very accurate designation. They were detested because they practised graft. Even Gabinius the proconsul of Syria was accused by Cicero of relieving Syrians and Jews of legitimate taxes for graft. He ordered some of the tax-officers removed. Already Jesus had spoken of the publican (5:46|) in a way that shows the public disfavour in which they were held.
rwp@Matthew:11:7 @{As these went their way} (\toutn poreuomenn\). Present participle genitive absolute. The eulogy of Jesus was spoken as the two disciples of John were going away. Is it a matter of regret that they did not hear this wondrous praise of John that they might cheer him with it? "It may almost be called the funeral oration of the Baptist, for not long afterwards Herodias compassed his death" (Plummer). {A reed shaken by the wind} (\kalamon hupo anemou saleuomenon\). Latin _calamus_. Used of the reeds that grew in plenty in the Jordan Valley where John preached, of a staff made of a reed (Matthew:27:29|), as a measuring rod (Revelation:11:1|), of a writer's pen (3John:1:13|). The reeds by the Jordan bent with the wind, but not so John.
rwp@Matthew:11:25 @{At that season Jesus answered and said} (\en ekeini ti kairi apokritheis eipen\). Spoke to his Father in audible voice. The time and place we do not know. But here we catch a glimpse of Jesus in one of his moods of worship. "It is usual to call this golden utterance a prayer, but it is at once prayer, praise, and self-communing in a devout spirit" (Bruce). Critics are disturbed because this passage from the Logia of Jesus or Q of Synoptic criticism (Matthew:11:25-30; strkjv@Luke:10:21-24|) is so manifestly Johannine in spirit and very language, "the Father" (\ho patr\), "the son" (\ho huios\), whereas the Fourth Gospel was not written till the close of the first century and the Logia was written before the Synoptic Gospels. The only satisfying explanation lies in the fact that Jesus did have this strain of teaching that is preserved in John's Gospel. Here he is in precisely the same mood of elevated communion with the Father that we have reflected in John 14 to 17. Even Harnack is disposed to accept this Logion as a genuine saying of Jesus. The word "thank" (\homologoumai\) is better rendered "praise" (Moffatt). Jesus praises the Father "not that the \sophoi\ were ignorant, but that the \npioi\ knew" (McNeile).
rwp@Matthew:12:24 @{The Pharisees} (\hoi de Pharisaioi\). Already (Matthew:9:32-34|) we have had in Matthew the charge that Jesus is in league with the prince of demons, though the incident may be later than this one. See on ¯10:25| about "Beelzebub." The Pharisees feel that the excited condition of the crowds and the manifest disposition to believe that Jesus is the Messiah (the Son of David) demand strenuous action on their part. They cannot deny the fact of the miracles for the blind and dumb men both saw and spoke (12:22|). Songs:in desperation they suggest that Jesus works by the power of Beelzebub the prince of the demons.
rwp@Matthew:12:36 @{Every idle word} (\pan rhma argon\). An ineffective, useless word (\a\ privative and \ergon\). A word that does no good and so is pernicious like pernicious anaemia. It is a solemn thought. Jesus who knows our very thoughts (12:25|) insists that our words reveal our thoughts and form a just basis for the interpretation of character (12:37|). Here we have judgment by words as in strkjv@25:31-46| where Jesus presents judgment by deeds. Both are real tests of actual character. Homer spoke of "winged words" (\pteroenta epea\). And by the radio our words can be heard all round the earth. Who knows where they stop?
rwp@Matthew:13:3 @{Many things in parables} (\polla en parabolais\). It was not the first time that Jesus had used parables, but the first time that he had spoken so many and some of such length. He will use a great many in the future as in Luke 12 to 18 and Matt. 24 and 25. The parables already mentioned in Matthew include the salt and the light (5:13-16|), the birds and the lilies (6:26-30|), the splinter and the beam in the eye (7:3-5|), the two gates (7:13f.|), the wolves in sheep's clothing (7:15|), the good and bad trees (7:17-19|), the wise and foolish builders (7:24-27|), the garment and the wineskins (9:16f.|), the children in the market places (11:16f.|). It is not certain how many he spoke on this occasion. Matthew mentions eight in this chapter (the Sower, the Tares, the Mustard Seed, the Leaven, the Hid Treasure, the Pearl of Great Price, the Net, the Householder). Mark adds the Parable of the Lamp (Mark:4:21; strkjv@Luke:8:16|), the Parable of the Seed Growing of Itself (Mark:4:26-29|), making ten of which we know. But both Mark (Mark:4:33|) and Matthew (13:34|) imply that there were many others. "Without a parable spake he nothing unto them" (Matthew:13:34|), on this occasion, we may suppose. The word parable (\parabol\ from \paraball\, to place alongside for measurement or comparison like a yardstick) is an objective illustration for spiritual or moral truth. The word is employed in a variety of ways (a) as for sententious sayings or proverbs (Matthew:15:15; strkjv@Mark:3:23; strkjv@Luke:4:23; strkjv@5:36-39; strkjv@6:39|), for a figure or type (Heb. strkjv@9:9; strkjv@11:19|); (b) a comparison in the form of a narrative, the common use in the Synoptic Gospels like the Sower; (c) "A narrative illustration not involving a comparison" (Broadus), like the Rich Fool, the Good Samaritan, etc. "The oriental genius for picturesque speech found expression in a multitude of such utterances" (McNeile). There are parables in the Old Testament, in the Talmud, in sermons in all ages. But no one has spoken such parables as these of Jesus. They hold the mirror up to nature and, as all illustrations should do, throw light on the truth presented. The fable puts things as they are not in nature, Aesop's Fables, for instance. The parable may not be actual fact, but it could be so. It is harmony with the nature of the case. The allegory (\allgoria\) is a speaking parable that is self-explanatory all along like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_. All allegories are parables, but not all parables are allegories. The Prodigal Son is an allegory, as is the story of the Vine and Branches (John:15|). John does not use the word parable, but only \paroimia\, a saying by the way (John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). As a rule the parables of Jesus illustrate one main point and the details are more or less incidental, though sometimes Jesus himself explains these. When he does not do so, we should be slow to interpret the minor details. Much heresy has come from fantastic interpretations of the parables. In the case of the Parable of the Sower (13:3-8|) we have also the careful exposition of the story by Jesus (18-23|) as well as the reason for the use of parables on this occasion by Jesus (9-17|).
rwp@Matthew:15:18 @{Out of the mouth} (\ek tou stomatos\). Spoken words come out of the heart and so are a true index of character. By "heart" (\kardias\) Jesus means not just the emotional nature, but the entire man, the inward life of "evil thoughts" (\dialogismoi ponroi\) that issue in words and deeds. "These defile the man," not "eating with unwashed hands." The captious quibblings of the Pharisees, for instance, had come out of evil hearts.
rwp@Matthew:16:16 @Peter is the spokesman now: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" (\Su ei ho Christos ho huios tou theou tou zntos\). It was a noble confession, but not a new claim by Jesus. Peter had made it before (John:6:69|) when the multitude deserted Jesus in Capernaum. Since the early ministry (John 4) Jesus had avoided the word Messiah because of its political meaning to the people. But now Peter plainly calls Jesus the Anointed One, the Messiah, the Son of the God the living one (note the four Greek articles). This great confession of Peter means that he and the other disciples believe in Jesus as the Messiah and are still true to him in spite of the defection of the Galilean populace (John 6).
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:16:23 @{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:17:3 @{There appeared} (\phth\). Singular aorist passive verb with Moses (to be understood also with Elijah), but the participle \sunlalountes\ is plural agreeing with both. "Sufficient objectivity is guaranteed by the vision being enjoyed by all three" (Bruce). The Jewish apocalypses reveal popular expectations that Moses and Elijah would reappear. Both had mystery connected with their deaths. One represented law, the other prophecy, while Jesus represented the gospel (grace). They spoke of his decease (Luke:9:31|), the cross, the theme uppermost in the mind of Christ and which the disciples did not comprehend. Jesus needed comfort and he gets it from fellowship with Moses and Elijah.
rwp@Matthew:17:10 @{Elijah must first come} (\Eleian dei elthein prton\). Songs:this piece of theology concerned them more than anything else. They had just seen Elijah, but Jesus the Messiah had come before Elijah. The scribes used strkjv@Malachi:4:5|. Jesus had also spoken again of his death (resurrection). Songs:they are puzzled.
rwp@Matthew:17:25 @{Jesus spake first to him} (\proephthasen auton ho Isous legn\). Here only in the N.T. One example in a papyrus B.C. 161 (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The old idiomatic use of \phthan\ with the participle survives in this example of \prophthan\ in strkjv@Matthew:17:25|, meaning to anticipate, to get before one in doing a thing. The _Koin_ uses the infinitive thus with \phthan\ which has come to mean simply to arrive. Here the anticipation is made plain by the use of \pro-\. See Robertson's _Grammar_, p. 1120. The "prevent" of the Authorized Version was the original idea of _praevenire_, to go before, to anticipate. Peter felt obliged to take the matter up with Jesus. But the Master had observed what was going on and spoke to Peter first. {Toll or tribute} (\tel knson\). Customs or wares collected by the publicans (like \phoros\, strkjv@Romans:13:7|) and also the capitation tax on persons, indirect and direct taxation. \Knsos\ is the Latin _census_, a registration for the purpose of the appraisement of property like \h apograph\ in strkjv@Luke:2:2; strkjv@Acts:5:37|. By this parable Jesus as the Son of God claims exemption from the temple tax as the temple of his Father just as royal families do not pay taxes, but get tribute from the foreigners or aliens, subjects in reality.
rwp@Matthew:18:1 @{Who then is greatest} (\tis ara meizn estin\). The \ara\ seems to point back to the tax-collection incident when Jesus had claimed exemption for them all as "sons" of the Father. But it was not a new dispute, for jealousy had been growing in their hearts. The wonderful words of Jesus to Peter on Mount Hermon (Matthew:16:17-19|) had evidently made Peter feel a fresh sense of leadership on the basis of which he had dared even to rebuke Jesus for speaking of his death (16:22|). And then Peter was one of the three (James and John also) taken with the Master up on the Mount of Transfiguration. Peter on that occasion had spoken up promptly. And just now the tax-collectors had singled out Peter as the one who seemed to represent the group. Mark (Mark:9:33|) represents Jesus as asking them about their dispute on the way into the house, perhaps just after their question in strkjv@Matthew:18:1|. Jesus had noticed the wrangling. It will break out again and again (Matthew:20:20-28; strkjv@Luke:22:24|). Plainly the primacy of Peter was not yet admitted by the others. The use of the comparative \meizn\ (so \ho meizn\ in verse 4|) rather than the superlative \megistos\ is quite in accord with the _Koin_ idiom where the comparative is displacing the superlative (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 667ff.). But it is a sad discovery to find the disciples chiefly concerned about their own places (offices) in the political kingdom which they were expecting.
rwp@Matthew:20:13 @{To one of them} (\heni autn\). Evidently the spokesman of the group. "Friend" (\hetaire\). Comrade. Songs:a kindly reply to this man in place of an address to the whole gang. strkjv@Genesis:31:40; strkjv@Job:27:21; strkjv@Hosea:13:15|. The word survives in modern Greek.
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:23:27 @{Whited sepulchre} (\taphois kekoniamenois\). The perfect passive participle is from \konia\ and that from \konia\, dust or lime. Whitened with powdered lime dust, the sepulchres of the poor in the fields or the roadside. Not the rock-hewn tombs of the well-to-do. These were whitewashed a month before the passover that travellers might see them and so avoid being defiled by touching them (Numbers:19:16|). In strkjv@Acts:23:3| Paul called the high priest a whited wall. When Jesus spoke the sepulchres had been freshly whitewashed. We today speak of whitewashing moral evil.
rwp@Matthew:23:29 @{The tombs of the prophets} (\tous taphous tn prophtn\). Cf. strkjv@Luke:11:48-52|. They were bearing witness against themselves (\heautois\, verse 31|) to "the murder-taint in your blood" (Allen). "These men who professed to be so distressed at the murdering of the Prophets, were themselves compassing the death of Him who was far greater than any Prophet" (Plummer). There are four monuments called Tombs of the Prophets (Zechariah, Absalom, Jehoshaphat, St. James) at the base of the Mount of Olives. Some of these may have been going up at the very time that Jesus spoke. In this seventh and last woe Jesus addresses the Jewish nation and not merely the Pharisees.
rwp@Matthew:26:65 @{He hath spoken blasphemy} (\eblasphmsen\). There was no need of witnesses now, for Jesus had incriminated himself by claiming under oath to be the Messiah, the Son of God. Now it would not be blasphemy for the real Messiah to make such a claim, but it was intolerable to admit that Jesus could be the Messiah of Jewish hope. At the beginning of Christ's ministry he occasionally used the word Messiah of himself, but he soon ceased, for it was plain that it would create trouble. The people would take it in the sense of a political revolutionist who would throw off the Roman yoke. If he declined that role, the Pharisees would have none of him for that was the kind of a Messiah that they desired. But the hour has now come. At the Triumphal Entry Jesus let the Galilean crowds hail him as Messiah, knowing what the effect would be. Now the hour has struck. He has made his claim and has defied the High Priest.
rwp@Matthew:26:71 @{Into the porch} (\eis ton pulna\). But Peter was not safe out here, for another maid recognized him and spoke of him as "this fellow" (\houtos\) with a gesture to those out there.
rwp@Matthew:28:18 @{All authority} (\psa exousia\). Jesus came close to them (\proselthn\) and made this astounding claim. He spoke as one already in heaven with a world-wide outlook and with the resources of heaven at his command. His authority or power in his earthly life had been great (7:29; strkjv@11:27; strkjv@21:23f.|). Now it is boundless and includes earth and heaven. {Hath been given} (\edoth\) is a timeless aorist (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 836f.). It is the sublimist of all spectacles to see the Risen Christ without money or army or state charging this band of five hundred men and women with world conquest and bringing them to believe it possible and to undertake it with serious passion and power. Pentecost is still to come, but dynamic faith rules on this mountain in Galilee.
rwp@Revelation:1:6 @{And he made} (\kai epoisen\). Change from the participle construction, which would be \kai poisanti\ (first aorist active of \poie\) like \lusanti\ just before, a Hebraism Charles calls it, but certainly an anacoluthon of which John is very fond, as in strkjv@1:18; strkjv@2:2,9,20; strkjv@3:9; strkjv@7:14; strkjv@14:2f.; strkjv@15:3|. {Kingdom} (\basileian\). Songs:correctly Aleph A C, not \basileis\ (P cursives). Perhaps a reminiscence of strkjv@Exodus:19:6|, a kingdom of priests. In strkjv@5:10| we have again "a kingdom and priests." The idea here is that Christians are the true spiritual Israel in God's promise to Abraham as explained by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9|. {To be priests} (\hiereis\). In apposition with \basileian\, but with \kai\ (and) in strkjv@5:10|. Each member of this true kingdom is a priest unto God, with direct access to him at all times. {Unto his God and Father} (\ti thei kai patri autou\). Dative case and \autou\ (Christ) applies to both \thei\ and \patri\. Jesus spoke of the Father as his God (Matthew:27:46; strkjv@John:20:17|) and Paul uses like language (Ephesians:1:17|), as does Peter (1Peter:1:3|). {To him} (\auti\). Another doxology to Christ. "The adoration of Christ which vibrates in this doxology is one of the most impressive features of the book" (Moffatt). Like doxologies to Christ appear in strkjv@5:13; strkjv@7:10; strkjv@1Peter:4:11; strkjv@2Peter:3:18; strkjv@2Timothy:4:18; He strkjv@13:21|. These same words (\h doxa kai to kratos\) in strkjv@1Peter:4:11|, only \h doxa\ in strkjv@2Peter:3:18; strkjv@2Timothy:4:18|, but with several others in strkjv@Revelation:5:13; strkjv@7:10|.
rwp@Revelation:6:12 @{There was a great earthquake} (\seismos megas egeneto\). "There came a great earthquake." Jesus spoke of earthquakes in his great eschatological discourse (Mark:13:8|). In strkjv@Matthew:24:29| the powers of the heavens will be shaken. \Seismos\ is from \sei\, to shake, and occurs also in strkjv@Revelation:8:5; strkjv@11:13,19; strkjv@16:18|. The reference is not a local earthquake like those so common in Asia Minor. {As sackcloth of hair} (\hs sakkos trichinos\). \Sakkos\ (Attic \sakos\), Latin _saccus_, English _sack_, originally a bag for holding things (Genesis:42:25,35|), then coarse garment of hair (\trichinos\, old word from \thrix\, here only in N.T.) clinging to one like a sack, of mourners, suppliants, prophets leading austere lives (Matthew:3:4; strkjv@11:21; strkjv@Luke:10:13|). Here the hair is that of the black goat (Isaiah:50:3|). Cf. strkjv@Joel:2:10; strkjv@Ezekiel:32:7f.; strkjv@Isaiah:13:10; strkjv@Mark:13:24f|. See strkjv@Ecclesiastes:12:2| for eclipses treated as symbols of old age. Apocalyptic pictures all have celestial phenomena following earthquakes. {As blood} (\hs haima\). In strkjv@Acts:2:20| we find Peter interpreting the apocalyptic eschatological language of strkjv@Joel:2:31| about the sun being turned into darkness and the moon into blood as pointing to the events of the day of Pentecost as also "the great day of the Lord." Peter's interpretation of Joel should make us cautious about too literal an exegesis of these grand symbols.
rwp@Revelation:6:14 @{Was removed} (\apechristh\). First aorist passive indicative of \apochriz\, to separate, to part (Acts:15:39|). "The heaven was parted." {As a scroll when it is rolled up} (\hs biblion helissomenon\). Present passive participle of \heliss\, old verb, to roll up, in N.T. only here (from strkjv@Isaiah:34:4|) and strkjv@Hebrews:1:12| (from strkjv@Psalms:102:27|). Vivid picture of the expanse of the sky rolled up and away as a papyrus roll (Luke:4:17|). {Were moved} (\ekinthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \kine\, to move. {Out of their places} (\ek tn topn autn\). See also strkjv@16:20| for these violent displacements in the earth's crust. Cf. strkjv@Nahum:1:5; strkjv@Jeremiah:4:24|. Jesus spoke of faith removing mountains (of difficulty) as in strkjv@Mark:11:23| (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:13:2|).
rwp@Revelation:16:5 @{The angel of the waters} (\tou aggelou ton hudatn\). Genitive case object of \kousa\. See strkjv@7:1| for the four angels in control of the winds and strkjv@14:18| for the angel with power over fire. The rabbis spoke also of an angel with power over the earth and another over the sea. {Which art and which wast} (\ho n kai ho n\). See this peculiar idiom for God's eternity with \ho\ as relative before \n\ in strkjv@1:4,8; strkjv@4:8|, but without \ho erchomenos\ (the coming on, the one who is to be) there for the future as in strkjv@11:17|. {Thou Holy One} (\ho hosios\). Nominative form, but vocative case, as often. Note both \dikaios\ and \hosios\ applied to God as in strkjv@3:1; strkjv@15:3f|. {Because thou didst thus judge} (\hoti tauta ekrinas\). Reason for calling God \dikaios\ and \hosios\. The punishment on the waters is deserved. First aorist active indicative of \krin\, to judge.
rwp@Revelation:21:14 @{Had} (\echn\). Masculine present active participle of \ech\ instead of \echon\ (neuter like to \teichos\), and the participle occurs independently as if a principal verb (\eichen\) as often in this book. {Twelve foundations} (\themelious ddeka\). Foundation stones, old adjective (from \thema\, from \tithmi\), here as in strkjv@1Corinthians:3:11ff.; strkjv@2Timothy:2:19|, with \lithous\ (stones understood), though often neuter substantive to \themelion\ (Luke:6:48f.; strkjv@Acts:16:26|). See strkjv@Isaiah:28:16; strkjv@Hebrews:11:10|. Twelve because of the twelve apostles as foundation stones (Ephesians:2:20|). {On them} (\ep' autn\). On the twelve foundation stones. {Names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb} (\onomata tn ddeka apostoln tou arniou\). Jesus had spoken of twelve thrones for the apostles (Matthew:19:28|); names of all twelve are here written, not just that of Peter, as some would argue from strkjv@Matthew:16:18|. As a matter of fact, Christ is the corner stone or \akrogniaion\ (1Peter:2:6; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:10; strkjv@Ephesians:2:20|), though rejected by the Sanhedrin (Matthew:21:42ff.|). One may wonder if the name of Judas is on that stone or that of Matthias.
rwp@Revelation:22:15 @{Without} (\ex\). Outside the holy city, with which compare strkjv@21:8,27|. Dustierdieck supplies an imperative: "Out, ye dogs." {The dogs} (\hoi kunes\). Not literal dogs, but the morally impure (Deuteronomy:23:18; strkjv@2Kings:8:13; strkjv@Psalms:22:17,21; strkjv@Matthew:7:6; strkjv@Mark:7:27; strkjv@Phillipians:3:3|). Dogs in the Oriental cities are the scavengers and excite unspeakable contempt. {The sorcerers} (\hoi pharmakoi\). As in strkjv@21:8|, where are listed "the fornicators and the murderers and the idolaters," all "outside" the holy city here as there "in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, the second death." Both are pictures (symbolic language) of hell, the eternal absence from fellowship with God. Another time Jesus spoke of "the outer darkness" (\eis to skotos to exteron\, strkjv@Matthew:8:12; strkjv@22:13; strkjv@25:30|), outside of lighted house, as the abode of the damned. Another symbol is the worm that dies not (Mark:9:48|). {Every one that loveth and maketh a lie} (\ps philn kai poin pseudos\). An interpretation of \psin tois pseudesin\ (all liars) of strkjv@21:8| and of \poin pseudos\ (doing a lie) of strkjv@21:27|. Satan is the father of lying (John:8:44|) and Satan's home is a congenial place for those who love and practise lying (2Thessalonians:2:12|). See strkjv@1John:1:6| for not doing the truth and see also strkjv@Romans:1:25; strkjv@Ephesians:4:25|.
rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE APOCALYPTIC STYLE The book claims to be an apocalypse (Revelation:1:1|) and has to be treated as such. It is an unveiling (\apokalupsis\, from \apokalupt\) or revelation of Jesus Christ, a prophecy, in other words, of a special type, like Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Daniel in the Old Testament. There was a considerable Jewish apocalyptic literature by this time when John wrote, much of it B.C., some of it A.D., like the Book of Enoch, the Apocalypse of Baruch, the Book of Jubilees, the Assumption of Moses, the Psalms of Solomon, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Sibylline Oracles, some of them evidently "worked over by Christian hands" (Swete). Jesus himself used the apocalyptic style at times (Mark:13; strkjv@Matthew:24,25; strkjv@Luke:21|). Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:14| spoke of the unpremeditated apocalyptic utterances in the Christian meetings and suggested restraints concerning them. "The Revelation of John is the only written apocalypse, as it is the only written prophecy of the Apostolic age.... The first Christian apocalypse came on the crest of this long wave of apocalyptic effort" (Swete). The reason for this style of writing is usually severe persecution and the desire to deliver a message in symbolic form. The effort of Antiochus Epiphanes, who claimed to be "a god manifest," to hellenize the Jews aroused violent opposition and occasioned many apocalypses to cheer the persecuted Jews.
rwp@Romans:14:16 @{Your good} (\humn to agathon\). "The good thing of you" = the liberty or Christian freedom which you claim. {Be evil spoken of} (\blasphmeisth\). Present passive imperative of \blasphme\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:9:3; strkjv@Romans:3:8|.
rwp@Romans:14:17 @{The kingdom of God} (\h basileia tou theou\). Not the future kingdom of eschatology, but the present spiritual kingdom, the reign of God in the heart, of which Jesus spoke so often. See strkjv@1Corinthians:4:21|. Paul scores heavily here, for it is not found in externals like food and drink, but in spiritual qualities and graces.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}