Bible:
Filter: String:

NT-GOSPEL.filter - rwp supposed:

rwp@1Corinthians:11:21 @{Taketh before} (\prolambanei\). Before others. Old verb to take before others. It was conduct like this that led to the complete separation between the Love-feast and the Lord's Supper. It was not even a common meal together (\koinon deipnon\), not to say a Lord's \deipnon\. It was a mere {grab-game}. {This one is hungry} (\hos de peini\). Demonstrative \hos\. Nothing is left for him at the love-feast. {Another is drunken} (\hos de methuei\). Such disgusting conduct was considered shameful in heathen club suppers. "Hungry poor meeting intoxicated rich, at what was supposed to be a supper of the Lord" (Robertson and Plummer). On \methu\, to be drunk, see on ¯Matthew:24:49; strkjv@Acts:2:15|.

rwp@2Peter:3:1 @{Beloved} (\agaptoi\). With this vocative verbal (four times in this chapter), Peter "turns away from the Libertines and their victims" (Mayor). {This is now the second epistle that I write unto you} (\tautn d deuteran humin graph epistoln\). Literally, "This already a second epistle I am writing to you." For \d\ see strkjv@John:21:24|. It is the predicate use of \deuteran epistoln\ in apposition with \tautn\, not "this second epistle." Reference apparently to I Peter. {And in both of them} (\en hais\). "In which epistles." {I stir up} (\diegeir\). Present active indicative, perhaps conative, "I try to stir up." See strkjv@1:13|. {Mind} (\dianoian\). Understanding (Plato) as in strkjv@1Peter:1:13|. {Sincere} (\eilikrin\). Old adjective of doubtful etymology (supposed to be \heil\, sunlight, and \krin\, to judge by it). Plato used it of ethical purity (\psuch eilikrins\) as here and strkjv@Phillipians:1:10|, the only N.T. examples. {By putting you in remembrance} (\en hupomnsei\). As in strkjv@1:13|.

rwp@Acts:7:43 @{The tabernacle of Moloch} (\tn sknn tou Moloch\). Or tent of Moloch which they took up after each halt instead of the tabernacle of Jehovah. Moloch was the god of the Amorites to whom children were offered as live sacrifices, an ox-headed image with arms outstretched in which children were placed and hollow underneath so that fire could burn underneath. {The star of the god Rephan} (\to astron tou theou Rompha\). Spelled also Romphan and Remphan. Supposed to be Coptic for the star Saturn to which the Egyptians, Arabs, and Phoenicians gave worship. But some scholars take the Hebrew _Kiyyoon_ to mean statues and not a proper name at all, "statues of your gods" carried in procession, making "figures" (\tupous\) with both "tabernacle" and "star" which they carried in procession. {I will carry} (\metoiki\). Attic future of \metoikis\ from \metoikiz\. {Beyond Babylon} (\epekeina Babulnos\). The Hebrew and the LXX have "beyond Damascus." An adverbial preposition (\ep' ekeina\ with \mer\ understood) used in the old Greek and the LXX with the ablative case and meaning "beyond." Here only in the N.T. in quotation from strkjv@Amos:5:27|.

rwp@Acts:8:9 @{Simon} (\Simn\). One of the common names (Josephus, _Ant_. XX. 7, 2) and a number of messianic pretenders had this name. A large number of traditions in the second and third centuries gathered round this man and Baur actually proposed that the Simon of the Clementine Homilies is really the apostle Paul though Paul triumphed over the powers of magic repeatedly (Acts:13:6-12; strkjv@19:11-19|), "a perfect absurdity" (Spitta, _Apostelgeschichte_, p. 149). One of the legends is that this Simon Magus of Acts is the father of heresy and went to Rome and was worshipped as a god (so Justin Martyr). But a stone found in the Tiber A.D. 1574 has an inscription to _Semoni Sanco Deo Fidio Sacrum_ which is (Page) clearly to Hercules, Sancus being a Sabine name for Hercules. This Simon in Samaria is simply one of the many magicians of the time before the later gnosticism had gained a foothold. "In his person Christianity was for the first time confronted with superstition and religious imposture, of which the ancient world was at this period full" (Furneaux). {Which beforetime used sorcery} (\prouprchen mageun\). An ancient idiom (periphrastic), the present active participle \mageun\ with the imperfect active verb from \prouparch\, the idiom only here and strkjv@Luke:23:12| in the N.T. Literally "Simon was existing previously practising magic." This old verb \mageu\ is from \magos\ (a \magus\, seer, prophet, false prophet, sorcerer) and occurs here alone in the N.T. {Amazed} (existann). Present active participle of the verb \existan\, later form of \existmi\, to throw out of position, displace, upset, astonish, chiefly in the Gospels in the N.T. Same construction as \mageun\. {Some great one} (\tina megan\). Predicate accusative of general reference (infinitive in indirect discourse). It is amazing how gullible people are in the presence of a manifest impostor like Simon. The Magi were the priestly order in the Median and Persian empires and were supposed to have been founded by Zoroaster. The word \magoi\ (magi) has a good sense in strkjv@Matthew:2:1|, but here and in strkjv@Acts:13:6| it has the bad sense like our "magic."

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:19:13 @{Of the strolling Jews, exorcists} (\tn perierchomenn Ioudain exorkistn\). These exorcists travelled around (\peri\) from place to place like modern Gypsy fortune-tellers. The Jews were especially addicted to such practices with spells of sorcery connected with the name of Solomon (Josephus, _Ant_. VIII. 2.5). See also Tobit strkjv@8:1-3. Jesus alludes to those in Palestine (Matthew:12:27; strkjv@Luke:11:19|). The exorcists were originally those who administered an oath (from \exorkiz\, to exact an oath), then to use an oath as a spell or charm. Only instance here in the N.T. These men regarded Paul as one of their own number just as Simon Magus treated Simon Peter. Only here these exorcists paid Paul the compliment of imitation instead of offering money as Magus did. {To name over} (\onomazein epi\). They heard what Paul said and treated his words as a magic charm or spell to drive the evil spirits out. {I adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth} (\Horkiz humas ton Isoun hon Paulos krussei\). Note two accusatives with the verb of swearing (cf. strkjv@Mark:5:7|) as a causative verb (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 483). The papyri furnish numerous instances of \horkiz\ in such constructions (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 281). Note also the article with Jesus, "the Jesus," as if to identify the magic word to the demons with the addition "whom Paul preaches." They thought that success turned on the correct use of the magical formula. The Ephesian mysteries included Christianity, so they supposed.

rwp@Acts:19:38 @{Have a matter against any one} (\echousin pros tina logon\). For this use of \ech logon\ with \pros\ see strkjv@Matthew:5:32; strkjv@Colossians:3:13|. The town-clerk names Demetrius and the craftsmen (\technitai\) as the parties responsible for the riot. {The courts are open} (\agoraioi agontai\). Supply \hmerai\ (days), court days are kept, or \sunodoi\, court-meetings are now going on, Vulgate _conventus forenses aguntur_. Old adjective from \agora\ (forum) marketplace where trials were held. Cf. strkjv@Acts:17:4|. There were regular court days whether they were in session then or not. {And there are proconsuls} (\kai anthupatoi eisin\). Asia was a senatorial province and so had proconsuls (general phrase) though only one at a time, "a rhetorical plural" (Lightfoot). Page quotes from an inscription of the age of Trajan on an aqueduct at Ephesus in which some of Luke's very words occur (\nekoros, anthupatos, grammateus, dmos\). {Let them accuse one another} (\egkaleitsan alllois\). Present active imperative of \egkale\ (\en, kale\), old verb to call in one's case, to bring a charge against, with the dative. Luke uses the verb six times in Acts for judicial proceedings (19:38,40; strkjv@23:28,29; strkjv@26:2,7|). The town-clerk makes a definite appeal to the mob for orderly legal procedure as opposed to mob violence in a matter where money and religious prejudice unite, a striking rebuke to so-called lynch-law proceedings in lands today where Christianity is supposed to prevail.

rwp@Acts:21:8 @{On the morrow} (\ti epaurion\). Another and the more common way of expressing this idea of "next day" besides the three in strkjv@20:15| and the one in strkjv@21:1|. {Unto Caesarea} (\eis Kaisarian\). Apparently by land as the voyage (\ploun\) ended at Ptolemais (verse 7|). Caesarea is the political capital of Judea under the Romans where the procurators lived and a city of importance, built by Herod the Great and named in honour of Augustus. It had a magnificent harbour built Most of the inhabitants were Greeks. This is the third time that we have seen Paul in Caesarea, on his journey from Jerusalem to Tarsus (Acts:9:30|), on his return from Antioch at the close of the second mission tour (18:22|) and now. The best MSS. omit \hoi peri Paulou\ (we that were of Paul's company) a phrase like that in strkjv@13:13|. {Into the house of Philip the evangelist} (\eis ton oikon Philippou tou euaggelistou\). Second in the list of the seven (6:5|) after Stephen and that fact mentioned here. By this title he is distinguished from "Philip the apostle," one of the twelve. His evangelistic work followed the death of Stephen (Acts:8|) in Samaria, Philistia, with his home in Caesarea. The word "evangelizing" (\euggelizeto\) was used of him in strkjv@8:40|. The earliest of the three N.T. examples of the word "evangelist" (Acts:21:8; strkjv@Ephesians:4:11; strkjv@2Timothy:4:5|). Apparently a word used to describe one who told the gospel story as Philip did and may have been used of him first of all as John was termed "the baptizer" (\ho baptizn\, strkjv@Mark:1:4|), then "the Baptist" (\ho baptists\, strkjv@Matthew:3:1|). It is found on an inscription in one of the Greek islands of uncertain date and was used in ecclesiastical writers of later times on the Four Gospels as we do. As used here the meaning is a travelling missionary who "gospelized" communities. This is probably Paul's idea in strkjv@2Timothy:4:5|. In strkjv@Ephesians:4:11| the word seems to describe a special class of ministers just as we have them today. Men have different gifts and Philip had this of evangelizing as Paul was doing who is the chief evangelist. The ideal minister today combines the gifts of evangelist, herald, teacher, shepherd. "{We abode with him}" (\emeinamen par' auti\). Constative aorist active indicative. \Par auti\ (by his side) is a neat idiom for "at his house." What a joyful time Paul had in conversation with Philip. He could learn from him much of value about the early days of the gospel in Jerusalem. And Luke could, and probably did, take notes from Philip and his daughters about the beginnings of Christian history. It is generally supposed that the "we" sections of Acts represent a travel document by Luke (notes made by him as he journeyed from Troas to Rome). Those who deny the Lukan authorship of the whole book usually admit this. Songs:we may suppose that Luke is already gathering data for future use. If so, these were precious days for him.

rwp@James:5:19 @{If any one among you do err} (\ean tis en humin planthi\). Third-class condition (supposed case) with \ean\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \plana\, old verb, to go astray, to wander (Matthew:18:12|), figuratively (Hebrews:5:2|). {From the truth} (\apo ts altheias\). For truth see strkjv@1:18; strkjv@3:14; strkjv@John:8:32; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@3:18f|. It was easy then, and is now, to be led astray from Christ, who is the Truth. {And one convert him} (\kai epistrepsi tis auton\). Continuation of the third-class condition with the first aorist active subjunctive of \epistreph\, old verb, to turn (transitive here as in strkjv@Luke:1:16f.|, but intransitive often as strkjv@Acts:9:35|).

rwp@John:1:31 @{And I knew him not} (\kag ouk idein auton\). Repeated in verse 33|. Second past perfect of \oida\ as imperfect. He had predicted the Messiah and described him before he met him and baptized him. See the Synoptics for that story. Whether John knew Jesus personally before the baptism we do not know. {But that he should be made manifest to Israel} (\all' hina phanerthi ti Isral\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \phanero\. The purpose of John's ministry was to manifest to Israel with their spiritual privileges (1:49|) the presence of the Messiah. Hence he was baptizing in water those who confessed their sins, he means, as in strkjv@Mark:1:5|. The Synoptic account is presupposed all along here.

rwp@John:11:31 @{Followed her} (\kolouthsan auti\). First aorist active indicative of \akolouthe\ with associative instrumental case (\auti\). This crowd of consolers (\paramuthoumenoi\) meant kindly enough, but did the one wrong thing for Mary wished to see Jesus alone. People with kind notions often so act. The secrecy of Martha (verse 28|) was of no avail. {Supposing that she was going unto the tomb} (\doxantes hoti hupagei eis to mnmeion\). First aorist active participle of \doke\, justifying their conduct by a wrong inference. Note retention of present tense \hupagei\ in indirect discourse after the secondary tense \kolouthsan\. {To weep there} (\hina klausi ekei\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \klai\, old verb to weep. Sometimes to wail or howl in oriental style of grief, but surely not that here. At any rate this supposed purpose of Mary was a real reason for this crowd {not} to go with her.

rwp@John:13:10 @{He that is bathed} (\ho leloumenos\). Perfect passive articular participle of \lou\, to bathe the whole body (Acts:9:37|). {Save to wash his feet} (\ei m tous podas nipsasthai\). Aleph and some old Latin MSS. have only \nipsasthai\, but the other words are genuine and are really involved by the use of \nipsasthai\ (first aorist middle infinitive of \nipt\, to wash parts of the body) instead of \lousasthai\, to bathe the whole body (just used before). The guest was supposed to bathe (\lou\) before coming to a feast and so only the feet had to be washed (\nipt\) on removing the sandals. {Clean} (\katharos\). Because of the bath. For \katharos\ meaning external cleanliness see strkjv@Matthew:23:26; strkjv@27:59;| but in strkjv@John:15:3| it is used for spiritual purity as here in "ye are clean" (\katharoi\). {Every whit} (\holos\). All of the body because of the bath. For this same predicate use of \holos\ see strkjv@9:34|. {But not all} (\all' ouchi pantes\). Strongly put exception (\ouchi\). Plain hint of the treachery of Judas who is reclining at the table after having made the bargain with the Sanhedrin (Mark:14:11|). A year ago Jesus knew that Judas was a devil and said to the apostles: "One of you is a devil" (6:64,70|). But it did not hurt them then nor did they suspect each other then or now. It is far-fetched to make Jesus here refer to the cleansing power of his blood or to baptism as some do.

rwp@Luke:3:21 @{When all the people were baptised} (\en ti baptisthnai hapanta ton laon\). The use of the articular aorist infinitive here with \en\ bothers some grammarians and commentators. There is no element of time in the aorist infinitive. It is simply punctiliar action, literally "in the being baptized as to all the people." Luke does not say that all the people were baptized before Jesus came or were baptized at the same time. It is merely a general statement that Jesus was baptized in connexion with or at the time of the baptizing of the people as a whole. {Jesus also having been baptized} (\kai Isou baptisthentos\). Genitive absolute construction, first aorist passive participle. In Luke's sentence the baptism of Jesus is merely introductory to the descent of the Holy Spirit and the voice of the Father. For the narrative of the baptism see strkjv@Mark:1:9; strkjv@Matthew:3:13-16|. {And praying} (\kai proseuchomenou\). Alone in Luke who so often mentions the praying of Jesus. Present participle and so naturally meaning that the heaven was opened while Jesus was praying though not necessarily in answer to his prayer. {The heaven was opened} (\aneichthnai ton ouranon\). First aorist passive infinitive with double augment, whereas the infinitive is not supposed to have any augment. The regular form would be \anoichthnai\ as in D (Codex Bezae). Songs:the augment appears in the future indicative \kateaxei\ (Matthew:12:20|) and the second aorist passive subjunctive \kateagsin\ (John:19:31|). Such unusual forms appear in the _Koin_. This infinitive here with the accusative of general reference is the subject of \egeneto\ (it came to pass). strkjv@Matthew:3:16| uses the same verb, but strkjv@Mark:1:10| has \schizomenous\, rent asunder.

rwp@Luke:3:23 @{Jesus Himself} (\autos Isous\). Emphatic intensive pronoun calling attention to the personality of Jesus at this juncture. When he entered upon his Messianic work. {When he began to teach} (\archomenos\). The words "to teach" are not in the Greek text. The Authorized Version "began to be about thirty years of age," is an impossible translation. The Revised Version rightly supplies "to teach" (\didaskein\) after the present participle \archomenos\. Either the infinitive or the participle can follow \archomai\, usually the infinitive in the _Koin_. It is not necessary to supply anything (Acts:1:22|). {Was about thirty years of age} (\n hsei etn triakonta\). Tyndale has it right "Jesus was about thirty yere of age when he beganne." Luke does not commit himself definitely to precisely thirty years as the age of Christ. The Levites entered upon full service at that age, but that proves nothing about Jesus. God's prophets enter upon their task when the word of God comes to them. Jesus may have been a few months under or over thirty or a year or two less or more. {Being Son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli} (\n huios hs enomizeto Isph tou Helei\). For the discussion of the genealogy of Jesus see on ¯Matthew:1:1-17|. The two genealogies differ very widely and many theories have been proposed about them. At once one notices that Luke begins with Jesus and goes back to Adam, the Son of God, while Matthew begins with Abraham and comes to "Joseph the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ" (Matthew:1:16|). Matthew employs the word "begot" each time, while Luke has the article \tou\ repeating \huiou\ (Son) except before Joseph. They agree in the mention of Joseph, but Matthew says that "Jacob begat Joseph" while Luke calls "Joseph the son of Heli." There are other differences, but this one makes one pause. Joseph, of course, did not have two fathers. If we understand Luke to be giving the real genealogy of Jesus through Mary, the matter is simple enough. The two genealogies differ from Joseph to David except in the cases of Zorobabel and Salathiel. Luke evidently means to suggest something unusual in his genealogy by the use of the phrase "as was supposed" (\hs enomizeto\). His own narrative in strkjv@Luke:1:26-38| has shown that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. Plummer objects that, if Luke is giving the genealogy of Jesus through Mary, \huios\ must be used in two senses here (son as was supposed of Joseph, and grandson through Mary of Heli). But that is not an unheard of thing. In neither list does Matthew or Luke give a complete genealogy. Just as Matthew uses "begat" for descent, so does Luke employ "son" in the same way for descendant. It was natural for Matthew, writing for Jews, to give the legal genealogy through Joseph, though he took pains to show in strkjv@Matthew:1:16,18-25| that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. It was equally natural for Luke, a Greek himself and writing for the whole world, to give the actual genealogy of Jesus through Mary. It is in harmony with Pauline universality (Plummer) that Luke carries the genealogy back to Adam and does not stop with Abraham. It is not clear why Luke adds "the Son of God" after Adam (3:38|). Certainly he does not mean that Jesus is the Son of God only in the sense that Adam is. Possibly he wishes to dispose of the heathen myths about the origin of man and to show that God is the Creator of the whole human race, Father of all men in that sense. No mere animal origin of man is in harmony with this conception.

rwp@Luke:4:22 @{Bare him witness} (\emarturoun\). Imperfect active, perhaps inchoative. They all began to bear witness that the rumours were not exaggerations (4:14|) as they had supposed, but had foundation in fact if this discourse or its start was a fair sample of his teaching. The verb \marture\ is a very old and common one. It is frequent in Acts, Paul's Epistles, and the Johannine books. The substantive \martur\ is seen in our English \martyr\, one who witnesses even by his death to his faith in Christ. {And wondered} (\kai ethaumazon\). Imperfect active also, perhaps inchoative also. They began to marvel as he proceeded with his address. This verb is an old one and common in the Gospels for the attitude of the people towards Jesus. {At the words of grace} (\epi tois logois ts charitos\). See on ¯Luke:1:30; strkjv@2:52| for this wonderful word \charis\ so full of meaning and so often in the N.T. The genitive case (case of genus or kind) here means that the words that came out of the mouth of Jesus in a steady stream (present tense, \ekporeuomenois\) were marked by fascination and charm. They were "winning words" as the context makes plain, though they were also "gracious" in the Pauline sense of "grace." There is no necessary antithesis in the ideas of graceful and gracious in these words of Jesus. {Is not this Joseph's son?} (\Ouchi huios estin Isph houtos;\). Witness and wonder gave way to bewilderment as they began to explain to themselves the situation. The use of \ouchi\ intensive form of \ouk\ in a question expects the answer "yes." Jesus passed in Nazareth as the son of Joseph as Luke presents him in strkjv@3:23|. He does not stop here to correct this misconception because the truth has been already amply presented in strkjv@1:28-38; strkjv@2:49|. This popular conception of Jesus as the son of Joseph appears also in strkjv@John:1:45|. The puzzle of the people was due to their previous knowledge of Jesus as the carpenter (Mark:6:3|; the carpenter's son, strkjv@Matthew:13:55|). For him now to appear as the Messiah in Nazareth where he had lived and laboured as the carpenter was a phenomenon impossible to credit on sober reflection. Songs:the mood of wonder and praise quickly turned with whispers and nods and even scowls to doubt and hostility, a rapid and radical transformation of emotion in the audience.

rwp@Luke:6:1 @{On a sabbath} (\en sabbati\). This is the second sabbath on which Jesus is noted by Luke. The first was strkjv@Luke:4:31-41|. There was another in strkjv@John:5:1-47|. There is Western and Syrian (Byzantine) evidence for a very curious reading here which calls this sabbath "secondfirst" (\deuteroprti\). It is undoubtedly spurious, though Westcott and Hort print it in the margin. A possible explanation is that a scribe wrote "first" (\prti\) on the margin because of the sabbath miracle in strkjv@Luke:6:6-11|. Then another scribe recalled strkjv@Luke:4:31| where a sabbath is mentioned and wrote "second" (\deuteri\) also on the margin. Finally a third scribe combined the two in the word \deuteroprti\ that is not found elsewhere. If it were genuine, we should not know what it means. {Plucked} (\etillon\). Imperfect active. They were plucking as they went on through (\diaporeuesthai\). Whether wheat or barley, we do not know, not our "corn" (maize). {Did eat} (\sthion\). Imperfect again. See on ¯Matthew:12:1f.; strkjv@Mark:2:23f.| for the separate acts in supposed violence of the sabbath laws. {Rubbing them in their hands} (\pschontes tais chersin\). Only in Luke and only here in the N.T. This was one of the chief offences. "According to Rabbinical notions, it was reaping, threshing, winnowing, and preparing food all at once" (Plummer). These Pharisees were straining out gnats and swallowing camels! This verb \psch\ is a late one for \psa\, to rub.

rwp@Mark:14:51 @{A certain young man} (\neaniskos tis\). This incident alone in Mark. It is usually supposed that Mark himself, son of Mary (Acts:12:12|) in whose house they probably had observed the passover meal, had followed Jesus and the apostles to the Garden. It is a lifelike touch quite in keeping with such a situation. Here after the arrest he was following with Jesus (\sunkolouthei auti\, imperfect tense). Note the vivid dramatic present \kratousin\ (they seize him).

rwp@Mark:14:54 @{Peter had followed him afar off} (\Hosea:Petros apo makrothen kolouthsen auti\). Here Mark uses the constative aorist (\kolouthsen\) where strkjv@Matthew:26:58|, and strkjv@Luke:22:54| have the picturesque imperfect (\kolouthei\), was following. Possibly Mark did not care to dwell on the picture of Peter furtively following at a distance, not bold enough to take an open stand with Christ as the Beloved Disciple did, and yet unable to remain away with the other disciples. {Was sitting with} (\n sunkathmenos\). Periphrastic imperfect middle, picturing Peter making himself at home with the officers (\hupretn\), under rowers, literally, then servants of any kind. strkjv@John:18:25| describes Peter as standing (\hests\). Probably he did now one, now the other, in his restless weary mood. {Warming himself in the light} (\thermainomenos prs to phs\). Direct middle. Fire has light as well as heat and it shone in Peter's face. He was not hidden as much as he supposed he was.

rwp@Mark:16:5 @{Entering into the tomb} (\eiselthousai eis to mnmeion\). Told also by strkjv@Luke:24:3|, though not by Matthew. {A young man} (\neaniskon\). An angel in strkjv@Matthew:28:5|, two men in strkjv@Luke:24|. These and like variations in details show the independence of the narrative and strengthen the evidence for the general fact of the resurrection. The angel sat upon the stone (Matthew:28:2|), probably at first. Mark here speaks of the young man {sitting on the right side} (\kathmenon en tois dexiois\) inside the tomb. Luke has the two men standing by them on the inside (Luke strkjv@24:4|). Possibly different aspects and stages of the incident. {Arrayed in a white robe} (\peribeblmenon stoln leukn\). Perfect passive participle with the accusative case of the thing retained (verb of clothing). strkjv@Luke:24:4| has "in dazzling apparel." {They were amazed} (\exethambthsan\). They were utterly (\ex\ in composition) amazed. strkjv@Luke:24:5| has it "affrighted." strkjv@Matthew:28:3f.| tells more of the raiment white as snow which made the watchers quake and become as dead men. But this was before the arrival of the women. Mark, like Matthew and Luke, does not mention the sudden departure of Mary Magdalene to tell Peter and John of the grave robbery as she supposed (John:20:1-10|).

rwp@Matthew:1:19 @{A Righteous Man} (\dikaios\). Or just, not benignant or merciful. The same adjective is used of Zacharias and Elizabeth (Luke:1:6|) and Simeon (Luke:2:25|). "An upright man," the _Braid Scots_ has it. He had the Jewish conscientiousness for the observance of the law which would have been death by stoning (Deuteronomy:22:23|). Though Joseph was upright, he would not do that. "As a good Jew he would have shown his zeal if he had branded her with public disgrace" (McNeile). {And yet not willing} (\kai m theln\). Songs:we must understand \kai\ here, "and yet." Matthew makes a distinction here between "willing" (\theln\) and "wishing" (\eboulth\), that between purpose (\thel\) and desire (\boulomai\) a distinction not always drawn, though present here. It was not his purpose to "make her a public example" (\deigmatisai\), from the root (\deiknumi\ to show), a rare word (Colossians:2:15|). The Latin Vulgate has it _traducere_, the Old Latin _divulgare_, Wycliff _pupplische_ (publish), Tyndale _defame_, Moffatt _disgrace_, Braid Scots "Be i the mooth o' the public." The substantive (\deigmatismos\) occurs on the Rosetta Stone in the sense of "verification." There are a few instances of the verb in the papyri though the meaning is not clear (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). The compound form appears (\paradeigmatiz\) in strkjv@Hebrews:6:6| and there are earlier instances of this compound than of the uncompounded, curiously enough. But new examples of the simple verb, like the substantive, may yet be found. The papyri examples mean to furnish a sample (P Tebt. 5.75), to make trial of (P Ryl. I. 28.32). The substantive means exposure in (P Ryl. I. 28.70). At any rate it is clear that Joseph "was minded to put her away privily." He could give her a bill of divorcement (\apolusai\), the \gt\ laid down in the Mishna, without a public trial. He had to give her the writ (\gt\) and pay the fine (Deuteronomy:24:1|). Songs:he proposed to do this privately (\lathrai\) to avoid all the scandal possible. One is obliged to respect and sympathize with the motives of Joseph for he evidently loved Mary and was appalled to find her untrue to him as he supposed. It is impossible to think of Joseph as the actual father of Jesus according to the narrative of Matthew without saying that Matthew has tried by legend to cover up the illegitimate birth of Jesus. The Talmud openly charges this sin against Mary. Joseph had "a short but tragic struggle between his legal conscience and his love" (McNeile).

rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{Wise men from the east} (\magoi apo anatoln\). The etymology of \Magi\ is quite uncertain. It may come from the same Indo-European root as _(megas) magnus_, though some find it of Babylonian origin. Herodotus speaks of a tribe of Magi among the Medians. Among the Persians there was a priestly caste of Magi like the Chaldeans in Babylon (Daniel:1:4|). Daniel was head of such an order (Daniel:2:48|). It is the same word as our "magician" and it sometimes carried that idea as in the case of Simon Magus (Acts:8:9,11|) and of Elymas Barjesus (Acts:13:6,8|). But here in Matthew the idea seems to be rather that of astrologers. Babylon was the home of astrology, but we only know that the men were from the east whether Arabia, Babylon, Persia, or elsewhere. The notion that they were kings arose from an interpretation of Is strkjv@60:3; strkjv@Revelation:21:24|. The idea that they were three in number is due to the mention of three kinds of gifts (gold, frankincense, myrrh), but that is no proof at all. Legend has added to the story that the names were Caspar, Balthasar, and Melchior as in _Ben Hur_ and also that they represent Shem, Ham, and Japhet. A casket in the Cologne Cathedral actually is supposed to contain the skulls of these three Magi. The word for east (\apo anatoln\) means "from the risings" of the sun.

rwp@Matthew:3:7 @{The Pharisees and Sadducees} (\tn Pharisain kai Saddoukain\). These two rival parties do not often unite in common action, but do again in strkjv@Matthew:16:1|. "Here a strong attraction, there a strong repulsion, made them for the moment forget their differences" (McNeile). John saw these rival ecclesiastics "coming for baptism" (\erchomenous epi to baptisma\). Alford speaks of "the Pharisees representing hypocritical superstition; the Sadducees carnal unbelief." One cannot properly understand the theological atmosphere of Palestine at this time without an adequate knowledge of both Pharisees and Sadducees. The books are numerous besides articles in the Bible dictionaries. I have pictured the Pharisees in my first (1916) Stone Lectures, _The Pharisees and Jesus_. John clearly grasped the significance of this movement on the part of the Pharisees and Sadducees who had followed the crowds to the Jordan. He had welcomed the multitudes, but right in the presence of the crowds he exposes the hypocrisy of the ecclesiastics. {Ye offspring of vipers} (\gennmata echidnn\). Jesus (Matthew:12:34; strkjv@23:33|) will use the same language to the Pharisees. Broods of snakes were often seen by John in the rocks and when a fire broke out they would scurry (\phugein\) to their holes for safety. "The coming wrath" was not just for Gentiles as the Jews supposed, but for all who were not prepared for the kingdom of heaven (1Thessalonians:1:10|). No doubt the Pharisees and Sadducees winced under the sting of this powerful indictment.

rwp@Matthew:4:24 @{The report of him went forth into all Syria} (\aplthen h ako autou eis holn tn Syrian\). Rumour (\ako\) carries things almost like the wireless or radio. The Gentiles all over Syria to the north heard of what was going on in Galilee. The result was inevitable. Jesus had a moving hospital of patients from all over Galilee and Syria. "{Those that were sick}" (\tous kaks echontas\), literally "those who had it bad," cases that the doctors could not cure. "{Holden with divers diseases and torments}" (\poikilais nosois kai basanois sunechomenous\). "Held together" or "compressed" is the idea of the participle. The same word is used by Jesus in strkjv@Luke:12:50| and by Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| and of the crowd pressing on Jesus (Luke:8:45|). They brought these difficult and chronic cases (present tense of the participle here) to Jesus. Instead of "divers" say "various" (\poikilais\) like fever, leprosy, blindness. The adjective means literally many colored or variegated like flowers, paintings, jaundice, etc. Some had "torments" (\basanois\). The word originally (oriental origin) meant a touchstone, "Lydian stone" used for testing gold because pure gold rubbed on it left a peculiar mark. Then it was used for examination by torture. Sickness was often regarded as "torture." These diseases are further described "in a descending scale of violence" (McNeile) as "demoniacs, lunatics, and paralytics" as Moffatt puts it, "demoniacs, epileptics, paralytics" as Weymouth has it, (\daimonizomenous kai selniazomenous kai paralutikous\), people possessed by demons, lunatics or "moon-struck" because the epileptic seizures supposedly followed the phases of the moon (Bruce) as shown also in strkjv@Matthew:17:15|, paralytics (our very word). Our word "lunatic" is from the Latin _luna_ (moon) and carries the same picture as the Greek \selniazomai\ from \seln\ (moon). These diseases are called "torments."

rwp@Matthew:6:12 @{Our debts} (\ta opheilmata hmn\). Luke (Luke:11:4|) has "sins" (\hamartias\). In the ancient Greek \opheilma\ is common for actual legal debts as in strkjv@Romans:4:4|, but here it is used of moral and spiritual debts to God. "Trespasses" is a mistranslation made common by the Church of England Prayer Book. It is correct in verse 14| in Christ's argument about prayer, but it is not in the Model Prayer itself. See strkjv@Matthew:18:28,30| for sin pictured again by Christ "as debt and the sinner as a debtor" (Vincent). We are thus described as having wronged God. The word \opheil\ for moral obligation was once supposed to be peculiar to the New Testament. But it is common in that sense in the papyri (Deismann, _Bible Studies_, p. 221; _Light from the Ancient East,_ New ed., p. 331). We ask forgiveness "in proportion as" (\hs\) we _also_ have forgiven those in debt to us, a most solemn reflection. \Aphkamen\ is one of the three k aorists (\ethka, edka, hka\). It means to send away, to dismiss, to wipe off.

rwp@Matthew: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:16:26 @{Gain} (\kerdsi\) and {profit} (\zmithi\). Both aorist subjunctives (one active, the other passive) and so punctiliar action, condition of third class, undetermined, but with prospect of determination. Just a supposed case. The verb for "forfeit" occurs in the sense of being fined or mulcted of money. Songs:the papyri and inscriptions. {Exchange} (\antallagma\). As an exchange, accusative in apposition with \ti\. The soul has no market price, though the devil thinks so. "A man must give, surrender, his life, and nothing less to God; no \antallagma\ is possible" (McNeile). This word \antallagma\ occurs twice in the _Wisdom of Sirach_: "There is no exchange for a faithful friend" (6:15); "There is no exchange for a well-instructed soul" (26:14).

rwp@Matthew:17:15 @{Epileptic} (\selniazetai\). Literally, "moonstruck," "lunatic." The symptoms of epilepsy were supposed to be aggravated by the changes of the moon (cf. strkjv@4:24|). {He has it bad} (\kaks echei\) as often in the Synoptic Gospels.

rwp@Matthew:19:9 @{Except for fornication} (\parektos logou porneias\). This is the marginal reading in Westcott and Hort which also adds "maketh her an adulteress" (\poiei autn moicheuthnai\) and also these words: "and he that marrieth her when she is put away committeth adultery" (\kai ho apolelumenn gamsas moichatai\). There seems to be a certain amount of assimilation in various manuscripts between this verse and the words in strkjv@5:32|. But, whatever reading is accepted here, even the short one in Westcott and Hort (\m epi porneii\, not for fornication), it is plain that Matthew represents Jesus in both places as allowing divorce for fornication as a general term (\porneia\) which is technically adultery (\moicheia\ from \moicha or moicheu\). Here, as in strkjv@5:31f.|, a group of scholars deny the genuineness of the exception given by Matthew alone. McNeile holds that "the addition of the saving clause is, in fact, opposed to the spirit of the whole context, and must have been made at a time when the practice of divorce for adultery had already grown up." That in my opinion is gratuitous criticism which is unwilling to accept Matthew's report because it disagrees with one's views on the subject of divorce. He adds: "It cannot be supposed that Matthew wished to represent Jesus as siding with the school of Shammai." Why not, if Shammai on this point agreed with Jesus? Those who deny Matthew's report are those who are opposed to remarriage at all. Jesus by implication, as in strkjv@5:31|, does allow remarriage of the innocent party, but not of the guilty one. Certainly Jesus has lifted the whole subject of marriage and divorce to a new level, far beyond the petty contentions of the schools of Hillel and Shammai.

rwp@Matthew:20:12 @{Equal unto us} (\isous autous hmin\). Associative instrumental case \hmin\ after \isous\. It was a regular protest against the supposed injustice of the householder. {The burden of the day and the scorching wind} (\to baros ts hmeras kai ton kausna\). These last "did" work for one hour. Apparently they worked as hard as any while at it. A whole day's work on the part of these sweat-stained men who had stood also the sirocco, the hot, dry, dust-laden east wind that blasted the grain in Pharaoh's dream (Genesis:41:6|), that withered Jonah's gourd (Jonah:4:8|), that blighted the vine in Ezekiel's parable (Ezekiel:17:10|). They seemed to have a good case.

rwp@Matthew:24:15 @{Let him that readeth understand} (\ho anaginoskn noeit\). This parenthesis occurs also in strkjv@Mark:13:14|. It is not to be supposed that Jesus used these words. They were inserted by Mark as he wrote his book and he was followed by Matthew.

rwp@Matthew:28:5 @{Unto the women} (\tais gunaixin\). According to John, Mary Magdalene had left to go and tell Peter and John of the supposed grave robbery (John:20:1f.|). But the other women remained and had the interview with the angel (or men, Luke) about the empty tomb and the Risen Christ. {Jesus the Crucified} (\Isoun ton estaurmenon\). Perfect passive participle, state of completion. This he will always be. Songs:Paul will preach as essential to his gospel "and this one crucified" (\kai touton estaurmenon\, strkjv@1Corinthians:2:2|).

rwp@Romans:14:23 @{He that doubteth} (\ho diakrinomenos\). Present middle participle of \diakrin\, to judge between (\dia\), to hesitate. See strkjv@James:1:6f.| for this same picture of the double-minded man. Cf. strkjv@Romans:4:20; strkjv@Mark:11:23|. {Is condemned} (\katakekritai\). Perfect passive indicative of \katakrin\ (note \kata-\), "stands condemned." {If he eat} (\ean phagi\). Third class condition, \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive. If in spite of his doubt, he eat. {Whatsoever is not of faith is sin} (\pan ho ouk ek pistes hamartia estin\). {Faith} (\pistis\) here is subjective, one's strong conviction in the light of his relation to Christ and his enlightened conscience. To go against this combination is sin beyond a doubt. Some MSS. (A L etc.) put the doxology here which most place in strkjv@16:25-27|. But they all give chapters 15 and 16. Some have supposed that the Epistle originally ended here, but that is pure speculation. Some even suggest two editions of the Epistle. But chapter 15 goes right on with the topic discussed in chapter 14.