NT.filter - rwp chapter:
rwp@Info_1Corinthians
@ It is clear therefore that Paul wrote what we call I Corinthians in a disturbed state of mind. He had founded the church there, had spent two years there (Acts:18|), and took pardonable pride in his work there as a wise architect (1Corinthians:3:10|) for he had built the church on Christ as the foundation. He was anxious that his work should abide. It is plain that the disturbances in the church in Corinth were fomented from without by the Judaizers whom Paul had defeated at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:1-35; strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10|). They were overwhelmed there, but renewed their attacks in Antioch (Galatians:2:11-21|). Henceforth throughout the second mission tour they are a disturbing element in Galatia, in Corinth, in Jerusalem. While Paul is winning the Gentiles in the Roman Empire to Christ, these Judaizers are trying to win Paul's converts to Judaism. Nowhere do we see the conflict at so white a heat as in Corinth. Paul finally will expose them with withering sarcasm (2Corinthians:10-13|) as Jesus did the Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23| on that last day in the temple. Factional strife, immorality, perverted ideas about marriage, spiritual gifts, and the resurrection, these complicated problems are a vivid picture of church life in our cities today. The discussion of them shows Paul's manysidedness and also the powerful grasp that he has upon the realities of the gospel. Questions of casuistry are faced fairly and serious ethical issues are met squarely. But along with the treatment of these vexed matters Paul sings the noblest song of the ages on love (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13|) and writes the classic discussion on the resurrection (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:15|). If one knows clearly and fully the Corinthian Epistles and Paul's dealings with Corinth, he has an understanding of a large section of his life and ministry. No church caused him more anxiety than did Corinth (2Corinthians:11:28|).
rwp@1Corinthians:1:5 @{That} (\hoti\). Explicit specification of this grace of God given to the Corinthians. Paul points out in detail the unusual spiritual gifts which were their glory and became their peril (chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:12-14|). {Ye were enriched in him} (\eploutisthte en auti\). First aorist passive indicative of \ploutiz\, old causative verb from \ploutos\, wealth, common in Attic writers, dropped out for centuries, reappeared in LXX. In N.T. only three times and alone in Paul (1Corinthians:1:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:10,11|). The Christian finds his real riches in Christ, one of Paul's pregnant phrases full of the truest mysticism. {In all utterance and all knowledge} (\en panti logi kai pasi gnsei\). One detail in explanation of the riches in Christ. The outward expression (\logi\) here is put before the inward knowledge (\gnsei\) which should precede all speech. But we get at one's knowledge by means of his speech. Chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:12-14| throw much light on this element in the spiritual gifts of the Corinthians (the gift of tongues, interpreting tongues, discernment) as summed up in strkjv@1Corinthians:13:1,2|, the greater gifts of strkjv@12:31|. It was a marvellously endowed church in spite of their perversions.
rwp@1Corinthians:3:5 @{What then?} (\ti oun;\). He does not say \tis\ (who), but \ti\ (what), neuter singular interrogative pronoun. {Ministers} (\diakonoi\). Not leaders of parties or sects, but merely servants through whom ye believed. The etymology of the word Thayer gives as \dia\ and \konis\ "raising dust by hastening." In the Gospels it is the servant (Matthew:20:26|) or waiter (John:2:5|). Paul so describes himself as a minister (Colossians:1:23,25|). The technical sense of deacon comes later (Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@1Timothy:3:8,12|). {As the Lord gave to him} (\hs ho Kurios edken\). Hence no minister of the Lord like Apollos and Paul has any basis for pride or conceit nor should be made the occasion for faction and strife. This idea Paul enlarges upon through chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:3; 4| and it is made plain in chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:12|.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:1 @{Dare any of you?} (\tolmi tis humn;\). Does any one of you dare? Rhetorical question with present indicative of \tolma\, old verb from \tolma\, daring. Bengel: _grandi verbo notatur laesa majestas Christianorum_. "The word is an argument in itself" (Robertson and Plummer). Apparently Paul has an actual case in mind as in chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:5| though no name is called. {Having a matter against his neighbour} (\pragma echn pros ton heteron\). Forensic sense of \pragma\ (from \prass\, to do, to exact, to extort as in strkjv@Luke:3:13|), a case, a suit (Demosthenes 1020, 26), with the other or the neighbour as in strkjv@10:24; strkjv@14:17; strkjv@Galatians:6:4; strkjv@Romans:2:1|. {Go to law} (\krinesthai\). Present middle or passive (ch. strkjv@Romans:3:4|) in the same forensic sense as \krithnai\ in strkjv@Matthew:5:40|. \Krits\, judge, is from this verb. {Before the unrighteous} (\epi tn adikn\). This use of \epi\ with the genitive for "in the presence of" is idiomatic as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:14|, \epi Titou\, in the case of Titus. The Jews held that to bring a lawsuit before a court of idolaters was blasphemy against the law. But the Greeks were fond of disputatious lawsuits with each other. Probably the Greek Christians brought cases before pagan judges.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:12 @{Lawful} (\exestin\). Apparently this proverb may have been used by Paul in Corinth (repeated in strkjv@10:23|), but not in the sense now used by Paul's opponents. The "all things" do not include such matters as those condemned in chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:5; strkjv@6:1-11|. Paul limits the proverb to things not immoral, things not wrong _per se_. But even here liberty is not license. {But not all things are expedient} (\all' ou panta sumpherei\). Old word \sumpherei\, bears together for good and so worthwhile. Many things, harmless in themselves in the abstract, do harm to others in the concrete. We live in a world of social relations that circumscribe personal rights and liberties. {But I will not be brought under the power of any} (\all ouk eg exousiasthsomai hupo tinos\). Perhaps a conscious play on the verb \exestin\ for \exousiaz\ is from \exousia\ and that from \exestin\. Verb from Aristotle on, though not common (Dion. of Hal., LXX and inscriptions). In N.T. only here, strkjv@7:4; strkjv@Luke:22:25|. Paul is determined not to be a slave to anything harmless in itself. He will maintain his self-control. He gives a wholesome hint to those who talk so much about personal liberty.
rwp@1Corinthians:9:22 @{I became weak} (\egenomn asthens\). This is the chief point, the climax in his plea for the principle of love on the part of the enlightened for the benefit of the unenlightened (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:8|). He thus brings home his conduct about renouncing pay for preaching as an illustration of love (8:13|). {All things} (\panta\) {to all men} (\tois pasin\, the whole number) {by all means} (\pants\). Pointed play on the word all, {that I may save some} (\hina tinas ss\). This his goal and worth all the cost of adaptation. In matters of principle Paul was adamant as about Titus the Greek (Galatians:2:5|). In matters of expediency as about Timothy (Acts:16:3|) he would go half way to win and to hold. This principle was called for in dealing with the problem of eating meat offered to idols (Romans:14:1; strkjv@15:1; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14|).
rwp@1Corinthians:10:29 @{For why is my liberty judged by another conscience?} (\hina ti gar h eleutheria mou krinetai hupo alls suneidses;\). Supply \gentai\ (deliberative subjunctive) after \ti\. Paul deftly puts himself in the place of the strong brother at such a banquet who is expected to conform his conscience to that of the weak brother who makes the point about a particular piece of meat. It is an abridgment of one's personal liberty in the interest of the weak brother. Two individualities clash. The only reason is love which builds up (8:2| and all of chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13|). There is this eternal collision between the forces of progress and reaction. If they work together, they must consider the welfare of each other.
rwp@1Corinthians:11:1 @{Imitators of me} (\mimtai mou\). In the principle of considerate love as so clearly shown in chapters strkjv@1Corinthians:8-10| and in so far as (\kaths\) Paul is himself an imitator of Christ. The preacher is a leader and is bound to set an example or pattern (\tupos\) for others (Titus:2:7|). This verse clearly belongs to the preceding chapter and not to chapter 11.
rwp@1Corinthians:11:19 @{Must be} (\dei einai\). Since moral conditions are so bad among you (cf. chapters 1 to 6). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:18:7|. {Heresies} (\haireseis\). The schisms naturally become {factions} or {parties}. Cf. strifes (\erides\) in strkjv@1:11|. See on ¯Acts:15:5| for \haireseis\, a choosing, taking sides, holding views of one party, heresy (our word). "Heresy is theoretical schism, schism practical heresy." Cf. strkjv@Titus:3:10; strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. In Paul only here and strkjv@Galatians:5:20|. {That} (\hina\). God's purpose in these factions makes {the proved ones} (\hoi dokimoi\) become {manifest} (\phaneroi\). "These \haireseis\ are a magnet attracting unsound and unsettled minds" (Findlay). It has always been so. Instance so-called Christian Science, Russellism, New Thought, etc., today.
rwp@1Corinthians:12:1 @{Now concerning spiritual gifts} (\peri de tn pneumatikn\). Clearly one of the items asked about in the letter to Paul (7:1|) and introduced precisely as the problem of meats offered to idols (8:1|). This question runs to the end of chapter 14. Plainly much trouble had arisen in Corinth in the exercise of these gifts.
rwp@1Corinthians:12:9 @{Faith} (\pistis\). Not faith of surrender, saving faith, but wonder-working faith like that in strkjv@13:2| (Matthew:17:20; strkjv@21:21|). Note here \en ti auti pneumati\ (in the same Spirit) in contrast with \dia\ and \kata\ in verse 8|. {Gifts of healings} (\charismata iamatn\). \Iama\, old word from \iaomai\, common in LXX, in N.T. only in this chapter. It means acts of healing as in strkjv@Acts:4:30| (cf. strkjv@James:5:14|) and strkjv@Luke:7:21| (of Jesus). Note \en\ here as just before.
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@1Corinthians:12:31 @{The greater gifts} (\ta charismata ta meizona\). Paul unhesitatingly ranks some spiritual gifts above others. \Zlo\ here has good sense, not that of envy as in strkjv@Acts:7:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:13:4|. {And a still more excellent way} (\kai eti kath' huperboln hodon\). In order to gain the greater gifts. "I show you a way _par excellence_," beyond all comparison (superlative idea in this adjunct, not comparative), like \kath' huperboln eis huperboln\ (2Corinthians:4:17|). \Huperbol\ is old word from \huperball\, to throw beyond, to surpass, to excel (2Corinthians:3:10; strkjv@Ephesians:1:19|). "I show you a supremely excellent way." Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13| is this way, the way of love already laid down in strkjv@8:1| concerning the question of meats offered to idols (cf. strkjv@1John:4:7|). Poor division of chapters here. This verse belongs with chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13|.
rwp@1Corinthians:13:1 @{With the tongues} (\tais glssais\). Instrumental case. Mentioned first because really least and because the Corinthians put undue emphasis on this gift. Plato (_Symposium_, 197) and many others have written on love, but Paul has here surpassed them all in this marvellous prose-poem. It comes like a sweet bell right between the jangling noise of the gifts in chapters 12 and 14. It is a pity to dissect this gem or to pull to pieces this fragrant rose, petal by petal. Fortunately Paul's language here calls for little comment, for it is the language of the heart. "The greatest, strongest, deepest thing Paul ever wrote" (Harnack). The condition (\ean\ and present subjunctive, \lal kai m ech\, though the form is identical with present indicative) is of the third class, a supposable case. {But have not love} (\agapn de m ech\). This is the _crux_ of the chapter. Love is the way _par excellence_ of strkjv@12:31|. It is not yet clearly certain that \agap\ (a back-formation from \agapa\) occurs before the LXX and the N.T. Plutarch used \agapsis\. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 198) once suspected it on an inscription in Pisidia. It is still possible that it occurs in the papyri (Prayer to Isis). See _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 75 for details. The rarity of \agap\ made it easier for Christians to use this word for Christian love as opposed to \ers\ (sexual love). See also Moffatt's Love in the N.T. (1930) for further data. The word is rare in the Gospels, but common in Paul, John, Peter, Jude. Paul does not limit \agap\ at all (both toward God and man). Charity (Latin _caritas_) is wholly inadequate. "Intellect was worshipped in Greece, and power in Rome; but where did St. Paul learn the surpassing beauty of love?" (Robertson and Plummer). Whether Paul had ever seen Jesus in the flesh, he knows him in the spirit. One can substitute Jesus for love all through this panegyric. {I am become} (\gegona\). Second perfect indicative in the conclusion rather than the usual future indicative. It is put vividly, "I am already become." Sounding brass (\chalchos chn\). Old words. Brass was the earliest metal that men learned to use. Our word _echoing_ is \chn\, present active participle. Used in strkjv@Luke:21:25| of the roaring of the sea. Only two examples in N.T. {Clanging cymbal} (\kumbalon alalazon\). Cymbal old word, a hollow basin of brass. \Alalaz\, old onomatopoetic word to ring loudly, in lament (Mark:5:38|), for any cause as here. Only two N.T. examples.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:30 @{Why do we also stand in jeopardy every hour?} (\ti kai hmeis kinduneuomen pasan hran?\). We also as well as those who receive baptism which symbolizes death. Old verb from \kindunos\ (peril, danger), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:8:23|. Paul's Epistles and Acts (especially chapter strkjv@Acts:19|) throw light on Paul's argument. He was never out of danger from Damascus to the last visit to Rome. There are perils in Ephesus of which we do not know (2Corinthians:1:8f.|) whatever may be true as to an Ephesian imprisonment. G. S. Duncan (_St. Paul's Ephesian Ministry_, 1930) even argues for several imprisonments in Ephesus. The accusative of time (\pasan hran\) naturally means all through every hour (extension).
rwp@1John:4:1 @{Beloved} (\agaptoi\). Three times in this chapter (1,7,11|) we have this tender address on love. {Believe not every spirit} (\m panti pneumati pisteuete\). "Stop believing," as some were clearly carried away by the spirits of error rampant among them, both Docetic and Cerinthian Gnostics. Credulity means gullibility and some believers fall easy victims to the latest fads in spiritualistic humbuggery. {Prove the spirits} (\dokimazete ta pneumata\). Put them to the acid test of truth as the metallurgist does his metals. If it stands the test like a coin, it is acceptable (\dokimos\, strkjv@2Corinthians:10:18|), otherwise it is rejected (\adokimos\, strkjv@1Corinthians:9:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:5-7|). {Many false prophets} (\polloi pseudoprophtai\). Jesus had warned people against them (Matthew:7:15|), even when they as false Christs work portents (Matthew:24:11,24; strkjv@Mark:13:22|). It is an old story (Luke:6:26|) and recurs again and again (Acts:13:6; strkjv@Revelation:16:13; strkjv@19:20; strkjv@20:10|) along with false teachers (2Peter:2:1|). {Are gone out} (\exelluthasin\). Perfect active indicative of \exerchomai\. Cf. aorist in strkjv@2:19|. They are abroad always.
rwp@1Peter:4:17 @{For the time is come} (\hoti ho kairos\). No predicate, probably \estin\ (is) to be supplied. The phrase that follows comes from the vision of Ezekiel (chapter strkjv@Ezekiel:9|). The construction is unusual with \tou arxasthai\ (genitive articular aorist middle infinitive of \arch\), not exactly purpose or result, and almost in apposition (epexegetic), but note \tou elthein\ used as subject in strkjv@Luke:17:1|. The persecution on hand (1:7|) was a foretaste of more to come. By "house of God" he can mean the same as the "spiritual house" of strkjv@2:5| or a local church. Biggs even takes it to refer to the family. {And if it begin first at us} (\ei de prton aph'hmn\). Condition of first class again, with the verb \archetai\ understood. "From us" (\aph' hmn\) more exactly. {End} (\telos\). Final fate. {Of them that obey not the gospel of God} (\tn apeithountn ti tou theou euaggelii\). "Of those disobeying the gospel of God." See the same idea in strkjv@Romans:2:8|. See strkjv@Mark:1:14| for believing in the gospel.
rwp@1Thessalonians:1:10 @{To wait for his Son from heaven} (\anamenein ton huion autou ek tn ourann\). Present infinitive, like \douleuein\, and so linear, to keep on waiting for. The hope of the second coming of Christ was real and powerful with Paul as it should be with us. It was subject to abuse then as now as Paul will have to show in this very letter. He alludes to this hope at the close of each chapter in this Epistle. {Whom he raised from the dead} (\hon geiren ek [tn] nekrn\). Paul gloried in the fact of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead of which fact he was himself a personal witness. This fact is the foundation stone for all his theology and it comes out in this first chapter. {Jesus which delivereth us from the wrath to come} (\Isoun ton ruomenon hms ek ts orgs ts erchomens\). It is the historic, crucified, risen, and ascended Jesus Christ, God's Son, who delivers from the coming wrath. He is our Saviour (Matthew:1:21|) true to his name Jesus. He is our Rescuer (Romans:11:26|, \ho ruomenos\, from strkjv@Isaiah:59:20|). It is eschatological language, this coming wrath of God for sin (1Thessalonians:2:16; strkjv@Romans:3:5; strkjv@5:9; strkjv@9:22; strkjv@13:5|). It was Paul's allusion to the day of judgment with Jesus as Judge whom God had raised from the dead that made the Athenians mock and leave him (Acts:17:31f.|). But Paul did not change his belief or his preaching because of the conduct of the Athenians. He is certain that God's wrath in due time will punish sin. Surely this is a needed lesson for our day. It was coming then and it is coming now.
rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ It is clear therefore that Paul wrote what we call I Corinthians in a disturbed state of mind. He had founded the church there, had spent two years there (Acts:18|), and took pardonable pride in his work there as a wise architect (1Corinthians:3:10|) for he had built the church on Christ as the foundation. He was anxious that his work should abide. It is plain that the disturbances in the church in Corinth were fomented from without by the Judaizers whom Paul had defeated at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:1-35; strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10|). They were overwhelmed there, but renewed their attacks in Antioch (Galatians:2:11-21|). Henceforth throughout the second mission tour they are a disturbing element in Galatia, in Corinth, in Jerusalem. While Paul is winning the Gentiles in the Roman Empire to Christ, these Judaizers are trying to win Paul's converts to Judaism. Nowhere do we see the conflict at so white a heat as in Corinth. Paul finally will expose them with withering sarcasm (2Corinthians:10-13|) as Jesus did the Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23| on that last day in the temple. Factional strife, immorality, perverted ideas about marriage, spiritual gifts, and the resurrection, these complicated problems are a vivid picture of church life in our cities today. The discussion of them shows Paul's manysidedness and also the powerful grasp that he has upon the realities of the gospel. Questions of casuistry are faced fairly and serious ethical issues are met squarely. But along with the treatment of these vexed matters Paul sings the noblest song of the ages on love (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13|) and writes the classic discussion on the resurrection (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:15|). If one knows clearly and fully the Corinthian Epistles and Paul's dealings with Corinth, he has an understanding of a large section of his life and ministry. No church caused him more anxiety than did Corinth (2Corinthians:11:28|).
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:11:1 @{Would that ye could bear with me} (\ophelon aneichesthe mou\). _Koin_ way of expressing a wish about the present, \ophelon\ (as a conjunction, really second aorist active indicative of \opheil\ without augment) and the imperfect indicative instead of \eithe\ or \ei gar\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1003). Cf. strkjv@Revelation:3:15|. See strkjv@Galatians:5:12| for future indicative with \ophelon\ and strkjv@1Corinthians:4:8| for aorist. \Mou\ is ablative case after \aneichesthe\ (direct middle, hold yourselves back from me). There is a touch of irony here. {Bear with me} (\anechesthe mou\). Either imperative middle or present middle indicative (ye do bear with me). Same form. {In a little foolishness} (\mikron ti aphrosuns\). Accusative of general reference (\mikron ti\). "Some little foolishness" (from \aphrn\, foolish). Old word only in this chapter in N.T.
rwp@2Corinthians:11:26 @{In journeyings} (\hodoiporiais\). Locative case of old word, only here in N.T. and strkjv@John:4:6|, from \hodoiporos\, wayfarer. {In perils} (\kindunois\). Locative case of \kindunos\, old word for danger or peril. In N.T. only this verse and strkjv@Romans:8:35|. The repetition here is very effective without the preposition \en\ (in) and without conjunctions (asyndeton). They are in contrasted pairs. The rivers of Asia Minor are still subject to sudden swellings from floods in the mountains. Cicero and Pompey won fame fighting the Cilician pirates and robbers (note \listn\, not \kleptn\, thieves, brigands or bandits on which see ¯Matthew:26:55|). The Jewish perils (\ek genous\, from my race) can be illustrated in strkjv@Acts:9:23,29; strkjv@13:50; strkjv@14:5; strkjv@17:5,13; strkjv@18:12; strkjv@23:12; strkjv@24:27|, and they were all perils in the city also. Perils from the Gentiles (\ex ethnn\) we know in Philippi (Acts:16:20|) and in Ephesus (Acts:19:23f.|). Travel in the mountains and in the wilderness was perilous in spite of the great Roman highways. {Among false brethren} (\en pseudadelphois\). Chapters strkjv@2Corinthians:10; 11| throw a lurid light on this aspect of the subject.
rwp@2Corinthians:12:4 @{Into Paradise} (\eis paradeison\). See on ¯Luke:23:43| for this interesting word. Paul apparently uses paradise as the equivalent of the third heaven in verse 2|. Some Jews (_Book of the Secrets of Enoch_, chapter viii) make Paradise in the third heaven. The rabbis had various ideas (two heavens, three, seven). We need not commit Paul to any "celestial gradation" (Vincent). {Unspeakable words} (\arrta rmata\). Old verbal adjective (\a\ privative, \rtos\ from \re\), only here in N.T. {Not lawful} (\ouk exon\). Copula \estin\ omitted. Hence Paul does {not} give these words.
rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE RESEMBLANCE TO THE EPISTLE OF JUDE This is undoubted, particularly between Jude:and the second chapter of II Peter. Kuhl argues that strkjv@2Peter:2:1-3:2| is an interpolation, though the same style runs through out the Epistle. "The theory of interpolation is always a last and desperate expedient" (Bigg). In II Peter 2 we have the fallen angels, the flood, the cities of the plain with Lot, Balaam. In Jude:we have Israel in the wilderness, the fallen angels, the cities of the plain (with no mention of Lot, Cain, Balaam, Korah). Jude:mentions the dispute between Michael and Satan, quotes Enoch by name. There is rather more freshness in Jude:than in II Peter, though II Peter is more intelligible. Evidently one had the other before him, besides other material. Which is the earlier? There is no way to decide this point clearly. Every point is looked at differently and argued differently by different writers. My own feeling is that Jude:was before (just before) II Peter, though it is only a feeling and not a conviction.
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@Info_Acts @ LUKE THE AUTHOR It ought to be possible to assume this as a fact since the work of Ramsay and Harnack on various phases of the problems concerning the Acts. Harnack, in particular, has covered the ground with his accustomed thoroughness and care in his two volumes (_The Acts of the Apostles_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1909; _The Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1911). Ramsay's view may be found in Chapter I of _St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen_, Chapter XII of _Pauline and Other Studies_. A good summary of the matter appears in Part V of _The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_ by Dr. D. A. Hayes, in Robertson's _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, and in the introduction to the various commentaries by Knowling, Rackham, Furneaux, Rendall, Hackett, Meyer-Wendt, Zahn, Blass, Campbell-Morgan, Stokes. In Part I of _The Acts of the Apostles_, Vol. II of _The Beginnings of Christianity_, edited by Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake both sides are ably presented: _The Case for the Tradition_ by C. W. Emmet, _The Case against the Tradition_ by H. Windisch. _The Internal Evidence of Acts_ is discussed by the Editors, Foakes-Jackson and Lake, with an adverse conclusion against Luke. Henry J. Cadbury surveys _The Tradition_ (the external evidence) and draws a negative conclusion likewise on the ground that the early writers who ascribe Acts to Luke were not critical scholars. A similar position is taken by Cadbury in his more recent volume, _The Making of Luke--Acts_ (1927). But all the same the traditional view that Luke is the author of the Acts holds the field with those who are not prejudiced against it. The view of Baur that Acts is a _Tendenz_ writing for the purpose of healing the breach between Peter and Paul and showing that the two factions came together had great influence for a while. In fact both Ramsay and Harnack at first held it. Ramsay broke away first and he was followed by Harnack. Both were influenced to change their views by the accumulation of evidence to the effect that the author of both the Gospel and Acts is Luke the Physician and Friend of Paul. Part of this evidence has already been given in the Introduction to the Gospel according to Luke.
rwp@Info_Acts @ THE UNITY OF THE ACTS There are some scholars who are willing to admit the Lukan authorship of the "we" sections when the author uses "we" and "us" as in chapter strkjv@16:10-40; strkjv@20:6-28:31|. It has been argued that Luke wrote a travel-document or diary for these sections, but that this material was used by the editor or redactor of the whole book. But, unfortunately for that view, the very same style appears in the Acts as a whole and in the Gospel also as Harnack has proven. The man who said "we" and "us" in the "we" sections wrote "I" in strkjv@1:1| and refers to the Gospel as his work. The effort to disprove the unity of the Acts has failed. It stands as the work of the same author as a whole and the same author who wrote the Gospel.
rwp@Info_Acts @ SOURCES OF THE ACTS Beyond a doubt Luke employed a variety of sources for this great history as he did for the Gospel (Luke:1:1-4|). In fact, Cadbury argues that this Prologue was meant to apply to the Acts also as Volume II whether he intended to write a third volume or not. Certainly we are entitled to say that Luke used the same historical method for Acts. Some of these sources are easy to see. Luke had his own personal experience for the "we" sections. Then he had the benefit of Paul's own notes or suggestions for all that portion where Paul figures from chapters 8 to 28, since Luke was apparently with Paul in Rome when he finished the Book. This would include Paul's sermons and addresses which Luke gives unless one wishes to say, as some do, that Luke followed the style of Thucydides and composed the kind of addresses that he thought Paul would make. I see no evidence of that for each address differs from the others and suits precisely the occasion when it was delivered. The ancients frequently employed shorthand and Paul may have preserved notes of his addresses. Prof. C. C. Torrey, of Yale University, argues in his _Composition and Date of Acts_ (1916) that Luke used an Aramaic document for the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. There is an Aramaic element in certain portions of these chapters, but nothing like so pronounced as in Luke 1 and 2 after strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. It cannot be said that Torrey has made out his case for such a single document. Luke may have had several such documents besides access to others familiar with the early days of the work in Jerusalem. There was Simon Peter whom Paul visited for two weeks in Jerusalem (Galatians:1:18|) besides other points of contact with him in Jerusalem and Antioch (Acts:15| and strkjv@Galatians:2|). There was also Barnabas who was early Paul's friend (Acts:9:27|) and who knew the beginnings as few did (Acts:4:36f.|). Besides many others it is to be observed that Paul with Luke made a special visit to Caesarea where he spent a week with the gifted Philip and his daughters with the gift of prophecy (Acts:21:8f.|). But with all the inevitable variety of sources for the information needed to cover the wide field of the Book of Acts the same mind has manifestly worked through it and it is the same style all through that appears in the "we" sections where the writer is confessedly a companion of Paul. No other companion of Paul carries this claim for the authorship and no other was a physician and no author has the external evidence from early writers.
rwp@Info_Acts @ THE PURPOSE OF THE ACTS It is not easy to say in a word precisely the object of Luke in writing this book. It is not the Acts of all the apostles. Outside of Peter and John little is told of any of them after chapter 3. And all the acts of Peter and John are not given for Peter disappears from the narrative after chapter 15, though he has been the central figure through chapter 11. Paul is not one of the twelve apostles, but Luke follows Paul's career mainly after chapter 8. Stephen and Barnabas come in also. Still (_St. Paul on Trial_, 1923) argues that Luke meant the book as an apology to be used in Paul's trial at Rome or at any rate to put Paul in the right light with the Jews in Rome. Hence the full account of Paul's series of defences in Jerusalem, Caesarea, Rome. There may be an element of truth in this idea, but it clearly does not cover the whole purpose of Luke. Others hold that Luke had a dramatic plan to get Paul to Rome as the climax of his campaign to win the Roman Empire to Christ. The book is not a history of all early Christianity. Peter and Paul dominate the atmosphere of the book with Paul as the great hero of Luke. But one can easily see that the work is done with consummate skill. The author is a man of culture, of Christian grace, of literary power. The book pulses with life today.
rwp@Acts:1:8 @{Power} (\dunamin\). Not the "power" about which they were concerned (political organization and equipments for empire on the order of Rome). Their very question was ample proof of their need of this new "power" (\dunamin\), to enable them (from \dunamai\, to be able), to grapple with the spread of the gospel in the world. {When the Holy Ghost is come upon you} (\epelthontos tou hagiou pneumatos eph' humas\). Genitive absolute and is simultaneous in time with the preceding verb "shall receive" (\lmpsesthe\). The Holy Spirit will give them the "power" as he comes upon them. This is the baptism of the Holy Spirit referred to in verse 5|. {My witnesses} (\mou martures\). Correct text. "Royal words of magnificent and Divine assurance" (Furneaux). Our word martyrs is this word \martures\. In strkjv@Luke:24:48| Jesus calls the disciples "witnesses to these things" (\martures toutn\, objective genitive). In strkjv@Acts:1:22| an apostle has to be a "witness to the Resurrection" of Christ and in strkjv@10:39| to the life and work of Jesus. Hence there could be no "apostles" in this sense after the first generation. But here the apostles are called "my witnesses." "His by a direct personal relationship" (Knowling). The expanding sphere of their witness when the Holy Spirit comes upon them is "unto the uttermost part of the earth" (\hes eschatou ts gs\). Once they had been commanded to avoid Samaria (Matthew:10:5|), but now it is included in the world program as already outlined on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:19; strkjv@Mark:16:15|). Jesus is on Olivet as he points to Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, the uttermost (last, \eschatou\) part of the earth. The program still beckons us on to world conquest for Christ. "The Acts themselves form the best commentary on these words, and the words themselves might be given as the best summary of the Acts" (Page). The events follow this outline (Jerusalem till the end of chapter 7, with the martyrdom of Stephen, the scattering of the saints through Judea and Samaria in chapter 8, the conversion of Saul, chapter 9, the spread of the gospel to Romans in Caesarea by Peter (chapter 10), to Greeks in Antioch (chapter 11), finally Paul's world tours and arrest and arrival in Rome (chapters 11 to 28).
rwp@Acts:5:42 @{Every day} (\psan hmeran\). Accusative of extent of time, all through every day. {In the temple and at home} (\en ti hieri kai kat' oikon\). This was a distinct triumph to go back to the temple where they had been arrested (verse 25|) and at home or from house to house, as it probably means (cf. strkjv@2:46|). It was a great day for the disciples in Jerusalem. {They ceased not} (\ouk epauonto\). Imperfect middle. They kept it up. {Jesus as the Christ} (\ton Christon Isoun\). Jesus is the direct object of the participles \didaskontes\ (teaching) and \euaggelizomenoi\ (preaching or evangelizing) while "the Christ" (\ton Christon\) is the predicate accusative. These words give the substance of the early apostolic preaching as these opening chapters of Acts show, that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah of promise. Gamaliel had opened the prison doors for them and they took full advantage of the opportunity that now was theirs.
rwp@Acts:8:1 @{Was consenting} (\n suneudokn\). Periphrastic imperfect of \suneudoke\, a late double compound (\sun, eu, doke\) that well describes Saul's pleasure in the death (\anairesis\, taking off, only here in the N.T., though old word) of Stephen. For the verb see on ¯Luke:23:32|. Paul himself will later confess that he felt so (Acts:22:20|), coolly applauding the murder of Stephen, a heinous sin (Romans:1:32|). It is a gruesome picture. Chapter 7 should have ended here. {On that day} (\en ekeini ti hmeri\). On that definite day, that same day as in strkjv@2:41|. {A great persecution} (\digmos megas\). It was at first persecution from the Sadducees, but this attack on Stephen was from the Pharisees so that both parties are now united in a general persecution that deserves the adjective "great." See on ¯Matthew:13:21| for the old word \digmos\ from \dik\, to chase, hunt, pursue, persecute. {Were all scattered abroad} (\pantes diesparsan\). Second aorist passive indicative of \diaspeir\, to scatter like grain, to disperse, old word, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:8:1,4; strkjv@11:19|. {Except the apostles} (\pln tn apostoln\). Preposition \pln\ (adverb from \pleon\, more) with the ablative often in Luke. It remains a bit of a puzzle why the Pharisees spared the apostles. Was it due to the advice of Gamaliel in strkjv@Acts:5:34-40|? Or was it the courage of the apostles? Or was it a combination of both with the popularity of the apostles in addition?
rwp@Acts:9:3 @{As he journeyed} (\en ti poreuesthai\). Luke's common idiom for a temporal clause (in the journeying), \en\ with the locative articular middle infinitive. {Drew nigh} (\eggizein\). Present active infinitive, was drawing nigh. {Shone round about him} (\auton peristrapsen\). First aorist (ingressive) active indicative of \periastrapt\, late compound verb common in LXX and Byzantine writers, here and strkjv@22:6| alone in the N.T. "A light from heaven suddenly flashed around him." It was like a flash of lightning. Paul uses the same verb in strkjv@22:5|, but in strkjv@26:13| he employs \perilampsan\ (shining around). There are numerous variations in the historical narrative of Saul's conversion in strkjv@9:3-18| and Luke's report of Paul's two addresses, one on the steps of the Tower of Antonia facing the murderous mob (22:6-16|), the other before Festus and Agrippa (26:12-20|). A great deal of capital has been made of these variations to the discredit of Luke as a writer as if he should have made Paul's two speeches conform at every point with his own narrative. This objection has no weight except for those who hold that Luke composed Paul's speeches freely as some Greek writers used to do. But, if Luke had notes of Paul's speeches or help from Paul himself, he naturally preserved the form of the two addresses without trying to make them agree with each other in all details or with his own narrative in chapter 9. Luke evidently attached great importance to the story of Saul's conversion as the turning point not simply in the career of the man, but an epoch in the history of apostolic Christianity. In broad outline and in all essentials the three accounts agree and testify to the truthfulness of the account of the conversion of Saul. It is impossible to overestimate the worth to the student of Christianity of this event from every angle because we have in Paul's Epistles his own emphasis on the actual appearance of Jesus to him as the fact that changed his whole life (1Corinthians:15:8; strkjv@Galatians:1:16f.|). The variations that appear in the three accounts do not mar the story, when rightly understood, as we shall see. Here, for instance, Luke simply mentions "a light from heaven," while in strkjv@22:6| Paul calls it "a great (\hikanon\) light" "about noon" and in strkjv@26:13| "above the brightness of the sun," as it would have to be "at midday" with the sun shining.
rwp@Acts:9:10 @{Ananias} (\Hananias\). Name common enough (cf. strkjv@5:1| for another Ananias) and means "Jehovah is gracious." _Nomen et omen_ (Knowling). This Ananias had the respect of both Jews and Christians in Damascus (22:12|). {In a vision} (\en horamati\). Zeller and others scout the idea of the historicity of this vision as supernatural. Even Furneaux holds that "it is a characteristic of the Jewish Christian sources to point out the Providential ordering of events by the literary device of a vision," as "in the early chapters of Matthew's and Luke's Gospels." He is content with this "beautiful expression of the belief" with no interest in the actual facts. But that is plain illusion, not to say delusion, and makes both Paul and Luke deceived by the story of Ananias (9:10-18; strkjv@22:12-16,26|). One MS. of the old Latin Version does omit the vision to Ananias and that is basis enough for those who deny the supernatural aspects of Christianity.
rwp@Acts:10:48 @{Commanded} (\prosetaxen\). First aorist active indicative. Peter himself abstained from baptizing on this occasion (cf. Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:14|). Evidently it was done by the six Jewish brethren. {Them to be baptized} (\autous baptisthnai\). Accusative of general reference with the first aorist passive infinitive. {In the name of Jesus Christ} (\en ti onomati Isou Christou\). The essential name in Christian baptism as in strkjv@2:38; strkjv@19:5|. But these passages give the authority for the act, not the formula that was employed (Alvah Hovey in Hackett's _Commentary_. See also chapter on the Baptismal Formula in my _The Christ of the Logia_). "Golden days" (\aurei dies\, Bengel) were these for the whole group.
rwp@Acts:11:4 @{Began} (\arxamenos\). Not pleonastic here, but graphically showing how Peter began at the beginning and gave the full story of God's dealings with him in Joppa and Caesarea. {Expounded} (\exetitheto\). Imperfect middle of \ektithmi\, to set forth, old verb, but in the N.T. only in Acts (7:21; strkjv@11:4; strkjv@18:26; strkjv@28:23|), a deliberate and detailed narrative "in order" (\kathexs\). Old word for in succession. In the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:1:2; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Acts:3:24; strkjv@11:14; strkjv@18:23|. Luke evidently considered this defence of Peter important and he preserves the marks of authenticity. It came originally from Peter himself (verses 5,6,15,16|). "The case of Cornelius was a test case of primary importance" (Page), "the first great difficulty of the early Church." Part of the story Luke gives three times (10:3-6,30-32; strkjv@11:13f.|). See the discussion chapter 10 for details given here.
rwp@Acts:11:30 @{Sending} (\aposteilantes\). First aorist active participle of \apostell\, coincident action with \epoisan\ (did). {To the elders} (\pros tous presbuterous\). The first use of that term for the Christian preachers. In strkjv@20:17,28| "elders" and "bishops" are used interchangeably as in strkjv@Titus:1:5,7|. The term probably arose gradually and holds a position in the church similar to the same term in the synagogue. The apostles were apparently absent from Jerusalem at this time and they were no longer concerned with serving tables. In strkjv@21:18| Paul presented the later collection also to the elders. Since Peter and James (till his death) were in Jerusalem during the persecution in chapter 12 it is probable that the visit of Barnabas and Saul to Jerusalem came really after that persecution for Peter left Jerusalem (12:17|). The elders here mentioned may include the preachers in Judea also outside of Jerusalem (26:20|).
rwp@Acts:12:17 @There were probably loud exclamations of astonishment and joy. {Beckoning with the hand} (\kataseisas ti cheiri\). First aorist active participle of \katasei\, old verb to signal or shake down with the hand (instrumental case \cheiri\). In the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:12:17; strkjv@13:16; strkjv@19:33; strkjv@21:40|. The speaker indicates by a downward movement of the hand his desire for silence (to hold their peace, \sigin\, present active infinitive, to keep silent). Peter was anxious for every precaution and he wanted their instant attention. {Declared} (\digsato\). First aorist middle of \digeomai\, old verb to carry through a narrative, give a full story. See also strkjv@Acts:9:27| of Barnabas in his defence of Saul. Peter told them the wonderful story. {Unto James and the brethren} (\Iakbi kai tois adelphois\). Dative case after \apaggeilate\ (first aorist active imperative). Evidently "James and the brethren" were not at this meeting, probably meeting elsewhere. There was no place where all the thousands of disciples in Jerusalem could meet. This gathering in the house of Mary may have been of women only or a meeting of the Hellenists. It is plain that this James the Lord's brother, is now the leading presbyter or elder in Jerusalem though there were a number (11:30; strkjv@21:18|). Paul even terms him apostle (Gal strkjv@1:19|), though certainly not one of the twelve. The twelve apostles probably were engaged elsewhere in mission work save James now dead (Acts:12:2|) and Peter. The leadership of James is here recognized by Peter and is due, partly to the absence of the twelve, but mainly to his own force of character. He will preside over the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:13|). {To another place} (\eis heteron topon\). Probably Luke did not know the place and certainly it was prudent for Peter to conceal it from Herod Agrippa. Probably Peter left the city. He is back in Jerusalem at the Conference a few years later (Acts:15:7|) and after the death of Herod Agrippa. Whether Peter went to Rome during these years we do not know. He was recognized later as the apostle to the circumcision (Gal strkjv@2:7; strkjv@1Peter:1:1|) and apparently was in Rome with John Mark when he wrote the First Epistle (1Peter:5:13|), unless it is the real Babylon. But, even if Peter went to Rome during this early period, there is no evidence that he founded the church there. If he had done so, in the light of strkjv@2Corinthians:10:16| it would be strange that Paul had not mentioned it in writing to Rome, for he was anxious not to build on another man's foundation (Romans:15:20|). Paul felt sure that he himself had a work to do in Rome. Unfortunately Luke has not followed the ministry of Peter after this period as he does Paul (appearing again only in chapter strkjv@Acts:15|). If Peter really left Jerusalem at this time instead of hiding in the city, he probably did some mission work as Paul says that he did (1Corinthians:9:5|).
rwp@Acts:17:3 @{Opening and alleging} (\dianoign kai paratithemenos\). Opening the Scriptures, Luke means, as made plain by the mission and message of Jesus, the same word (\dianoig\) used by him of the interpretation of the Scriptures by Jesus (Luke:24:32|) and of the opening of the mind of the disciples also by Jesus (Luke:24:45|) and of the opening of Lydia's heart by the Lord (16:14|). One cannot refrain from saying that such exposition of the Scriptures as Jesus and Paul gave would lead to more opening of mind and heart. Paul was not only "expounding" the Scriptures, he was also "propounding" (the old meaning of "allege") his doctrine or setting forth alongside the Scriptures (\para-tithemenos\), quoting the Scripture to prove his contention which was made in much conflict (1Thessalonians:2:2|), probably in the midst of heated discussion by the opposing rabbis who were anything but convinced by Paul's powerful arguments, for the Cross was a stumbling-block to the Jews (1Corinthians:1:23|). {That it behoved the Christ to suffer} (\hoti ton Christon edei pathein\). The second aorist active infinitive is the subject of \edei\ with \ton Christon\, the accusative of general reference. This is Paul's major premise in his argument from the Scriptures about the Messiah, the necessity of his sufferings according to the Scriptures, the very argument made by the Risen Jesus to the two on the way to Emmaus (Luke:24:25-27|). The fifty-third chapter of Isaiah was a passage in point that the rabbis had overlooked. Peter made the same point in strkjv@Acts:3:18| and Paul again in strkjv@Acts:26:23|. The minor premise is the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. {To rise again from the dead} (\anastnai ek nekrn\). This second aorist active infinitive \anastnai\ is also the subject of \edei\. The actual resurrection of Jesus was also a necessity as Paul says he preached to them (1Thessalonians:4:14|) and argued always from Scripture (1Corinthians:15:3-4|) and from his own experience (Acts:9:22; strkjv@22:7; strkjv@26:8,14; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:8|). {This Jesus is the Christ} (\houtos estin ho Christos, ho Isous\). More precisely, "This is the Messiah, viz., Jesus whom I am proclaiming unto you." This is the conclusion of Paul's line of argument and it is logical and overwhelming. It is his method everywhere as in Damascus, in Antioch in Pisidia, here, in Corinth. He spoke as an eye-witness.
rwp@Acts:20:5 @{Were waiting for us in Troas} (\emenon hms en Troiadi\). Here again we have "us" for the first time since chapter 16 where Paul was with Luke in Philippi. Had Luke remained all this time in Philippi? We do not know, but he is with Paul now till Rome is reached. The seven brethren of verse 4| went on ahead from Philippi to Troas while Paul remained with Luke in Philippi.
rwp@Acts:21:18 @{The day following} (\ti epiousi\). As in strkjv@20:15| which see. {Went in} (\eisiei\). Imperfect active of \eiseimi\, old classic verb used only four times in the N.T. (Acts:3:3; strkjv@21:18,26; strkjv@Hebrews:9:6|), a mark of the literary style rather than the colloquial _Koin_ use of \eiserchomai\. Together with us to James (\sun hmin pros Iakbon\). Songs:then Luke is present. The next use of "we" is in strkjv@27:1| when they leave Caesarea for Rome, but it is not likely that Luke was away from Paul in Jerusalem and Caesarea. The reports of what was done and said in both places is so full and minute that it seems reasonable that Luke got first hand information here whatever his motive was for so full an account of these legal proceedings to be discussed later. There are many details that read like an eye witness's story (21:30,35,40; strkjv@22:2,3; strkjv@23:12|, etc.). It was probably the house of James (\pros\ and \para\ so used often). {And all the elders were present} (\pantes te paregenonto hoi presbuteroi\). Clearly James is the leading elder and the others are his guests in a formal reception to Paul. It is noticeable that the apostles are not mentioned, though both elders and apostles are named at the Conference in chapter 15. It would seem that the apostles are away on preaching tours. The whole church was not called together probably because of the known prejudice against Paul created by the Judaizers.
rwp@Acts:26:1 @{Thou art permitted} (\epitrepetai soi\). Literally, It is permitted thee. As if Agrippa were master of ceremonies instead of Festus. Agrippa as a king and guest presides at the grand display while Festus has simply introduced Paul. {For thyself} (\huper seautou\). Some MSS. have \peri\ (concerning). Paul is allowed to speak in his own behalf. No charges are made against him. In fact, Festus has admitted that he has no real proof of any charges. {Stretched forth his hand} (\ekteinas tn cheira\). Dramatic oratorical gesture (not for silence as in strkjv@12:17; strkjv@13:16|) with the chain still upon it (verse 29|) linking him to the guard. First aorist active participle of \ektein\, to stretch out. {Made his defence} (\apelogeito\). Inchoative imperfect of \apologeomai\ (middle), "began to make his defence." This is the fullest of all Paul's defences. He has no word of censure of his enemies or of resentment, but seizes the opportunity to preach Christ to such a distinguished company which he does with "singular dignity" (Furneaux). He is now bearing the name of Christ "before kings" (Acts:9:15|). In general Paul follows the line of argument of the speech on the stairs (chapter strkjv@Acts:22|).
rwp@Acts:26:14 @{When we were all fallen} (\pantn katapesontn hmn\). Genitive absolute with second aorist active participle of \katapipt\. In the Hebrew language (\ti Ebraidi dialekti\). Natural addition here, for Paul is speaking in Greek, not Aramaic as in strkjv@22:2|. {It is hard for thee to kick against the goad} (\sklron soi pros kentra laktizein\). Genuine here, but not in chapters 9,22|. A common proverb as Aeschylus _Ag_. 1624: \Pros kentra m laktize\. "It is taken from an ox that being pricked with a goad kicks and receives a severer wound" (Page). Cf. the parables of Jesus (Matthew:13:35|). Blass observes that Paul's mention of this Greek and Latin proverb is an indication of his culture. Besides he mentions (not invents) it here rather than in chapter 22| because of the culture of this audience. \Kentron\ means either sting as of bees (II Macc. strkjv@14:19) and so of death (1Corinthians:15:55|) or an iron goad in the ploughman's hand as here (the only two N.T. examples). Note plural here (goads) and \laktizein\ is present active infinitive so that the idea is "to keep on kicking against goads." This old verb means to kick with the heel (adverb \lax\, with the heel), but only here in the N.T. There is a papyrus example of kicking (\laktiz\) with the feet against the door.
rwp@Acts:27:29 @{Lest haply we should be cast ashore on rocky ground} (\m pou kata tracheis topous ekpesmen\). The usual construction after a verb of fearing (\m\ and the aorist subjunctive \ekpesmen\). Literally, "Lest somewhere (\pou\) we should fall out down against (\kata\) rocky places." The change in the soundings made it a very real fear. \Tracheis\ (rough) is old adjective, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:3:5| (from strkjv@Isaiah:40:4|). {Four anchors} (\agkuras tessaras\). Old word from \agk\. In N.T. only in this chapter, with \rhipt\ here, with \ektein\ in verse 30|, with \periaire\ in verse 40|; and strkjv@Hebrews:6:19| (figuratively of hope). {From the stern} (\ek prumns\). Old word, but in N.T. only in strkjv@Mark:4:38|; here and 41| in contrast with \prira\ (prow). The usual practice was and is to anchor by the bows. "With a view to running the ship ashore anchoring from the stern would, it is said, be best" (Page). Nelson is quoted as saying that he had been reading strkjv@Acts:27| the morning of the Battle of Copenhagen (April, 1801) where he anchored his ships from the stern. {Wished for the day} (\uchonto\). Imperfect middle, kept on praying for "day to come" (\hmeran genesthai\) before the anchors broke under the strain of the storm or began to drag. If the ship had been anchored from the prow, it would have swung round and snapped the anchors or the stern would have faced the beach.
rwp@1Thessalonians:1:4 refers to 'Jude:1'. Usually with one chapter books, verses are
rwp@ referred to this way (without chapter). But strkjv@Jude:1:1 does not
rwp@ the refs to different chapters. strkjv@2:14 does not fit into anything here,
rwp@Info_Ephesians @ THE CHARACTER OF THE EPISTLE The same Gnostic heresy is met as in Colossians, but with this difference. In Colossians the emphasis is on the Dignity of Christ as the Head of the Church, while in Ephesians chief stress is placed upon the Dignity of the Church as the Body of Christ the Head. Paul has written nothing more profound than chapters strkjv@Ephesians:1-3| of Ephesians. Stalker termed them the profoundest thing ever written. He sounds the depths of truth and reaches the heights. Since Ephesians covers the same ground so largely as Colossians, only the words in Ephesians that differ or are additional will call for discussion.
rwp@Ephesians:3:10 @{To the intent that} (\hina\). Final clause. {Might be made known} (\gnristhi\). First aorist passive subjunctive of \gnriz\ with \hina\. The mystery was made known to Paul (3:3|) and now he wants it blazoned forth to all powers (Gnostic aeons or what not). {Through the church} (\dia ts ekklsias\). The wonderful body of Christ described in chapter strkjv@Ephesians:2|. {The manifold wisdom of God} (\h polupoikilos sophia tou theou\). Old and rare word, much-variegated, with many colours. Only here in N.T. \Poikilos\ (variegated) is more common (Matthew:4:24|).
rwp@Ephesians:4:4 @{One body} (\hen sma\). One mystical body of Christ (the spiritual church or kingdom, cf. strkjv@1:23; strkjv@2:16|). {One Spirit} (\hen pneuma\). One Holy Spirit, grammatical neuter gender (not to be referred to by "it," but by "he"). {In one hope} (\en mii elpidi\). The same hope as a result of their calling for both Jew and Greek as shown in chapter 2|.
rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ THE REASON FOR HIS EPISTLES In a real sense Paul's Epistles are tracts for the times, not for the age in general, but to meet real emergencies. He wrote to a particular church or group of churches or persons to meet immediate needs brought to his attention by messengers or letters. Dr. Deissmann contends strongly for the idea of calling Paul's Epistles "letters" rather than "Epistles." He gives a studied literary character to "epistles" as more or less artificial and written for the public eye rather than for definite effect. Four of Paul's Epistles are personal (those to Philemon, Titus, and Timothy) beyond a doubt, but in these which can properly be termed personal letters there are the principles of the gospel applied to personal, social, and ecclesiastical problems in such a pungent fashion that they possess permanent value. In the earliest group of Paul's Epistles, he reminds the Thessalonians of the official character of the Epistle which was meant for the church as a whole (1Thessalonians:5:27|). He says also: "But if any one does not obey our word by the epistle, mark this one, not to associate with him, that he may be put to shame" (2Thessalonians:3:14|). He calls attention to his signature as proof of the genuineness of every epistle (2Thessalonians:3:17|). He gave directions for the public reading of his epistles (Colossians:4:16|). He regarded them as the expression of God's will through the life of the churches and he put his whole heart into them. Two great controversies stirred Paul's life. That with the Judaizers called forth the great doctrinal group (I Corinthians, II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans). That with the Gnostics occasioned the Epistles to the Colossians and the Ephesians (Laodiceans) and this controversy ran on into the Pastoral Epistles. Each Epistle had its particular occasion which will be pointed out in due season. But even in the short ones like Philippians, Colossians and Ephesians Paul deals with the sublimest of all themes, the Person of Christ, with a masterfulness never equalled elsewhere. Even in I Corinthians, which deals so largely with church problems in Corinth, two great chapters rise to the heights of real eloquence (Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13| on Love and Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:15| on the Resurrection). Romans, the greatest of his Epistles, has the fullest discussion of Paul's gospel of grace and Chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:8| has a sweep of imagination and a grasp of faith unsurpassed. Hence, while denying to Paul the artificial rules of the rhetoricians attributed to him by Blass, I cannot agree that Paul's church Epistles are mere incidental letters. It is not a question whether Paul was writing for posterity or for the present emergency. He wrote for the present emergency in the most effective possible way. He brought the whole gospel message to bear upon the varied and pressing problems of the early Christians in the power of the Holy Spirit with the eloquence of a mind all ablaze with the truth and with a heart that yearned for their souls for Christ. They are not literary epistles, but they are more than personal letters. They are thunderbolts of passion and power that struck centre and that strike fire now for all who will take the trouble to come to them for the mind of Christ that is here.
rwp@Hebrews:8:1 @{In the things which we are saying} (\epi tois legomenois\). Locative case of the articular present passive participle of \leg\ after \epi\ as in strkjv@Luke:5:5; strkjv@Hebrews:11:4|, "in the matter of the things being discussed." {The chief point} (\kephalaion\). Neuter singular of the adjective \kephalaios\ (from \kephal\, head), belonging to the head. Vulgate _capitulum_, nominative absolute in old and common sense, the main matter (even so without the article as in Thucydides), "the pith" (Coverdale), common in the papyri as in Greek literature. The word also occurs in the sense of the sum total or a sum of money (Acts:22:28|) as in Plutarch, Josephus, and also in the papyri (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). {Such an high priest} (\toiouton archierea\). As the one described in chapters strkjv@4:16-7:28| and in particular strkjv@7:26| (\toioutos\) strkjv@7:27,28|. But the discussion of the priestly work of Jesus continues through strkjv@12:3|. \Toioutos\ is both retrospective and prospective. Here we have a summary of the five points of superiority of Jesus as high priest (8:1-6|). He is himself a better priest than Aaron (\toioutos\ in strkjv@8:1| such as shown in strkjv@4:16-7:28|); he works in a better sanctuary (8:2,5|); he offers a better sacrifice (8:3f.|); he is mediator of a better covenant (8:6|); his work rests on better promises (8:6|); hence he has obtained a better ministry as a whole (8:6|). In this resum (\kephelaion\) the author gives the pith (\kephalaion\) of his argument, curiously enough with both senses of \kephalaion\ (pith, summary) pertinent. He will discuss the four points remaining thus: (1) the better covenant, strkjv@8:7-13|. (2) The better sanctuary, strkjv@9:1-12|. (3) The better sacrifice, strkjv@9:13-10:18|. (4) The better promises, strkjv@10:19-12:3|. One point (the better high priest, like Melchizedek) has already been discussed (4:16-7:28|). {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). Repetition of strkjv@1:3| with \tou thronou\ (the throne) added. This phrase prepares the way for the next point.
rwp@Hebrews:11:1 @{Now faith is} (\estin de pistis\). He has just said that "we are of faith" (10:39|), not of apostasy. Now he proceeds in a chapter of great eloquence and passion to illustrate his point by a recital of the heroes of faith whose example should spur them to like loyalty now. {The assurance of things hoped for} (\elpizomenn hupostasis\). {Hupostasis} is a very common word from Aristotle on and comes from \huphistmi\ (\hupo\, under, \histmi\, intransitive), what stands under anything (a building, a contract, a promise). See the philosophical use of it in strkjv@1:3|, the sense of assurance (une assurance certaine, Mngoz) in strkjv@3:14|, that steadiness of mind which holds one firm (2Corinthians:9:4|). It is common in the papyri in business documents as the basis or guarantee of transactions. "And as this is the essential meaning in strkjv@Hebrews:11:1| we venture to suggest the translation 'Faith is the _title-deed_ of things hoped for'" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_, etc.). {The proving of things not seen} (\pragmatn elegchos ou blepomenn\). The only N.T. example of \elegchos\ (except Textus Receptus in strkjv@2Timothy:3:16| for \elegmon\). Old and common word from \elegch\ (Matthew:18:15|) for "proof" and then for "conviction." Both uses occur in the papyri and either makes sense here, perhaps "conviction" suiting better though not in the older Greek.
rwp@Hebrews:12:1 @{Therefore} (\toigaroun\). Triple compound inferential participle (\toi, gar, oun\) like the German _doch denn nun_, a conclusion of emphasis, old particle, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:8|. There should be no chapter division here, since strkjv@12:1-3| really is the climax in the whole argument about the better promises (10:19-12:3|) with a passionate appeal for loyalty to Christ. {Us also} (\kai hmeis\). We as well as "these all" of strkjv@11:39| and all the more because of the "something better" given us in the actual coming of Christ. {Compassed about} (\echontes perikeimenon\). Literally, "having (\echontes\, present active participle of \ech\) lying around us" (\perikeimenon\, present middle participle of \perikeimai\, old verb as in strkjv@Luke:17:2|). {Cloud of witnesses} (\nephos marturn\). Old word (Latin _nubes_), here only in the N.T., for vast mass of clouds. \Nephel\ is a single cloud. The metaphor refers to the great amphitheatre with the arena for the runners and the tiers upon tiers of seats rising up like a cloud. The \martures\ here are not mere spectators (\theatai\), but testifiers (witnesses) who testify from their own experience (11:2,4,5,33,39|) to God's fulfilling his promises as shown in chapter strkjv@Hebrews:11|. {Laying aside} (\apothemenoi\). Second aorist-middle (indirect, from ourselves) participle of \apotithmi\, old verb as in strkjv@Colossians:3:8| (laying off old clothes). The runners ran in the stadium nearly naked. {Every weight} (\ogkon panta\). Old word (kin to \enegkein, pher\) like \phortos, baros\. Here every encumbrance that handicaps like doubt, pride, sloth, anything. No trailing garment to hinder or trip one. {The sin which doth so easily beset us} (\tn euperistaton hamartian\). "The easily besetting sin." There are a dozen possible renderings of this double compound verbal from \eu\, well, and \periistmi\, to place around or to stand around (intransitive). The Vulgate has _circumstans nos peccatum_ (the sin standing around us). Probably this is the true idea here, "the easily encompassing (or surrounding) sin." In this case apostasy from Christ was that sin. In our cases it may be some other sin. The verbal adjective reminds one of the ring of wild beasts in the jungle that encircle the camp-fire at night each ready to pounce upon a careless victim. {Let us run} (\trechmen\). Present active volitive subjunctive of \trech\, "let us keep on running." {With patience} (\di' hupomons\). Not with impatience, doubt, or despair. {The race that is set before us} (\ton prokeimenon hmin agna\). Note the article and the present middle participle of \prokeimai\, old compound (already in strkjv@6:18|, and also in strkjv@12:2|). Dative case (\hmin\) of personal interest.
rwp@Hebrews:12:4 @{Resisted} (\antikatestte\). Second aorist active indicative (intransitive) of the double compound \antikathistmi\, old verb to stand in opposition against in line of battle, intransitively to stand face to face (\anti\) against (\kata\), here only in the N.T. {Unto blood} (\mechris haimatos\). "Up to blood." As was true of Jesus and many of the other heroes of faith in chapter strkjv@Hebrews:11|. {Striving} (\antagnizomenoi\). Present middle participle of \antagnizomai\, old verb with the same figure in \antikatestte\. {Against sin} (\pros hamartian\). Face to face with sin as in verse 1|.
rwp@Hebrews:13:7 @{Remember} (\mnmoneuete\). Present active imperative of \mnmoneu\, old verb to be _mindful_ of (from \mnmn\, mindful) with genitive (John:15:20|) or accusative (Matthew:16:9|). "Keep in mind." Cf. strkjv@11:22|. {Them that had the rule over you} (\tn hgoumenn humn\). Present middle participle of \hgeomai\ with genitive of the person (\humn\) as in verses 17,24|. The author reminds them of the founders of their church in addition to the long list of heroes in chapter strkjv@Acts:11|. See a like exhortation to respect and follow their leaders in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:12f|. Few lessons are harder for the average Christian to learn, viz., good following. {The word of God} (\ton logon tou theou\). The preaching of these early disciples, apostles, and prophets (1Corinthians:1:17|). {And considering the issue of their life} (\hn anatherountes tn ekbasin ts anastrophs\). No "and" in the Greek, but the relative \hn\ (whose) in the genitive case after \anastrophs\, "considering the issue of whose life." Present active participle of \anathere\, late compound, to look up a subject, to investigate, to observe accurately, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:17:23|. \Ekbasis\ is an old word from \ekbain\, to go out (Hebrews:11:15|, here only in N.T.), originally way out (1Corinthians:10:13|), but here (only other N.T. example) in sense of end or issue as in several papyri examples (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). {Imitate their faith} (\mimeisthe tn pistin\). Present middle imperative of \mimeomai\, old verb (from \mimos\, actor, mimic), in N.T. only here, strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:7,9; strkjv@3John:1:11|. Keep on imitating the faith of the leaders.
rwp@Info_James @ THE DATE If the Epistle is genuine and James was put to death about A.D. 62, it was clearly written before that date. There are two theories about it, one placing it about A.D. 48, the other about A.D. 58. To my mind the arguments of Mayor for the early date are conclusive. There is no allusion to Gentile Christians, as would be natural after A.D. 50. If written after A.D. 70, the tone would likely be different, with some allusion to that dreadful calamity. The sins condemned are those characteristic of early Jewish Christians. The book itself is more like the Sermon on the Mount than the Epistles. The discussion of faith and works in chapter strkjv@James:2| reveals an absence of the issues faced by Paul in strkjv@Romans:4; strkjv@Galatians:3| after the Jerusalem Conference (A.D. 49). Hence the date before that Conference has decidedly the better of the argument. Ropes in his Commentary denies the genuineness of the Epistle and locates it between A.D. 75 and 125, but Hort holds that the evidence for a late date rests "on very slight and intangible grounds." Songs:we place the book before A.D. 49. It may indeed be the earliest New Testament book.
rwp@James:1:19 @{Ye know this} (\iste\). Or "know this." Probably the perfect active indicative (literary form as in strkjv@Ephesians:5:5; strkjv@Hebrews:12:17|, unless both are imperative, while in strkjv@James:4:4| we have \oidate\, the usual vernacular _Koin_ perfect indicative). The imperative uses only \iste\ and only the context can decide which it is. \Esto\ (let be) is imperative. {Swift to hear} (\tachus eis to akousai\). For this use of \eis to\ with the infinitive after an adjective see strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:9|. For \eis to\ after adjectives see strkjv@Romans:16:19|. The picture points to listening to the word of truth (verse 18|) and is aimed against violent and disputatious speech (chapter strkjv@3:1-12|). The Greek moralists often urge a quick and attentive ear. {Slow to speak} (\bradus eis to lalsai\). Same construction and same ingressive aorist active infinitive, slow to begin speaking, not slow while speaking. {Slow to anger} (\bradus eis orgn\). He drops the infinitive here, but he probably means that slowness to speak up when angry will tend to curb the anger.
rwp@Info_John @ THE FOURTH GOSPEL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION GREATEST OF BOOKS The test of time has given the palm to the Fourth Gospel over all the books of the world. If Luke's Gospel is the most beautiful, John's Gospel is supreme in its height and depth and reach of thought. The picture of Christ here given is the one that has captured the mind and heart of mankind. It is not possible for a believer in Jesus Christ as the Son of God to be indifferent to modern critical views concerning the authorship and historical value of this Holy of Holies of the New Testament. Here we find _The Heart of Christ_ (E. H. Sears), especially in chapters strkjv@John:14-17|. If Jesus did not do or say these things, it is small consolation to be told that the book at least has symbolic and artistic value for the believer. The language of the Fourth Gospel has the clarity of a spring, but we are not able to sound the bottom of the depths. Lucidity and profundity challenge and charm us as we linger over it.
rwp@Info_John @ THE BELOVED DISCIPLE The book claims to be written by "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (John:21:20|) who is pointedly identified by a group of believers (apparently in Ephesus) as the writer: "This is the disciple which beareth witness of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his witness is true" (John:21:24|). This is the first criticism of the Fourth Gospel of which we have any record, made at the time when the book was first sent forth, made in a postscript to the epilogue or appendix. Possibly the book closed first with strkjv@John:20:31|, but chapter 21 is in precisely the same style and was probably added before publication by the author. The natural and obvious meaning of the language in strkjv@John:21:24| is that the Beloved Disciple wrote the whole book. He is apparently still alive when this testimony to his authorship is given. There are scholars who interpret it to mean that the Beloved Disciple is responsible for the facts in the book and not the actual writer, but that is a manifest straining of the language. There is in this verse no provision made for a redactor as distinct from the witness as is plausibly set forth by Dr. A. E. Garvie in _The Beloved Disciple_ (1922).
rwp@Info_John @ THE AUTHOR THE APOSTLE JOHN Loisy (_Leviticus:Quatr. Evangile_, p. 132) says that if one takes literally what is given in the body of the Gospel of the Beloved Disciple he is bound to be one of the twelve. Loisy does not take it "literally." But why not? Are we to assume that the author of this greatest of books is playing a part or using a deliberate artifice to deceive? It may be asked why John does not use his own name instead of a _nom de plume_. Reference can be made to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, no one of which gives the author's name. One can see a reason for the turn here given since the book consists so largely of personal experiences of the author with Christ. He thus avoids the too frequent use of the personal pronoun and preserves the element of witness which marks the whole book. One by one the other twelve apostles disappear if we test their claims for the authorship. In the list of seven in chapter strkjv@John:21| it is easy to drop the names of Simon Peter, Thomas, and Nathanael. There are left two unnamed disciples and the sons of Zebedee (here alone mentioned, not even named, in the book). John in this Gospel always means the Baptist. Why does the author so uniformly slight the sons of Zebedee if not one of them himself? In the Acts Luke does not mention his own name nor that of Titus his brother, though so many other friends of Paul are named. If the Beloved Disciple is John the Apostle, the silence about James and himself is easily understood. James is ruled out because of his early death (Acts:12:1|). The evidence in the Gospel points directly to the Apostle John as the author.
rwp@Info_John @ 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@Info_John @ THE SAME STYLE IN THE DISCOURSES It is further objected that there is no difference in style between the discourses of Jesus in John's Gospel and his own narrative style. There is an element of truth in this criticism. There are passages where it is not easy to tell where discourse ends and narrative begins. See, for instance, strkjv@John:3:16-21|. Does the discourse of Jesus end with verse 15,16, or 21? Songs:in strkjv@John:12:44-50|. Does John give here a resume of Christ's teaching or a separate discourse? It is true also that John preserves in a vivid way the conversational style of Christ as in chapters 4,6,7,8,9. In the Synoptic Gospels this element is not so striking, but we do not have to say that John has done as Shakespeare did with his characters. Each Gospel to a certain extent has the colouring of the author in reporting the words of Jesus. An element of this is inevitable unless men are mere automata, phonographs, or radios. But each Gospel preserves an accurate and vivid picture of Christ. We need all four pictures including that of John's Gospel for the whole view of Christ.
rwp@Info_John @ HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL It is just here that the chief attack is made on the Fourth Gospel even by some who admit the Johannine authorship. It is now assumed by some that the Fourth Gospel is not on a par with the Synoptics in historical reliability and some harmonies omit it entirely or place it separately at the close, though certainly Tatian used it with the Synoptics in his _Diatessaron_, the first harmony of the Gospels. Some even follow Schmiedel in seeing only a symbolic or parabolic character in the miracles in the Fourth Gospel, particularly in the narrative of the raising of Lazarus in chapter strkjv@John:11| which occurs here alone. But John makes this miracle play quite an important part in the culmination of events at the end. Clearly the author professes to be giving actual data largely out of his own experience and knowledge. It is objected by some that the Fourth Gospel gives an unnatural picture of Christ with Messianic claims at the very start. But the Synoptics give that same claim at the baptism and temptation, not to mention Luke's account of the Boy Jesus in the temple. The picture of the Jews as hostile to Jesus is said to be overdrawn in the Fourth Gospel. The answer to that appears in the Sermon on the Mount, the Sabbath miracles, the efforts of the Pharisees and lawyers to catch Jesus in his talk, the final denunciation in strkjv@Matthew:23|, all in the Synoptics. The opposition to Jesus grew steadily as he revealed himself more clearly. Some of the difficulties raised are gratuitous as in the early cleansing of the temple as if it could not have happened twice, confounding the draught of fishes in chapter strkjv@John:21| with that in strkjv@Luke:5|, making Mary of Bethany at the feast of a Simon in chapter strkjv@John:12| the same as the sinful woman at the feast of another Simon in strkjv@Luke:7|, making John's Gospel locate the last passover meal a day ahead instead of at the regular time as the Synoptics have it. Rightly interpreted these difficulties disappear. In simple truth, if one takes the Fourth Gospel at its face value, the personal recollections of the aged John phrased in his own way to supplement the narratives in the Synoptics, there is little left to give serious trouble. The Jerusalem ministry with the feasts is a case in point. The narrative of the call of the first disciples in chapter strkjv@John:1| is another. The author followed Simon in bringing also his own brother James to Jesus. John was present in the appearance of Christ before Annas, and Pilate. He was at the Cross when no other apostles were there. He took the mother of Jesus to his home and then returned to the Cross. He saw the piercing of the side of Jesus. He knew and saw the deed of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. E. H. Askwith has a most helpful discussion of this whole problem in _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910).
rwp@John:6:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). A common, but indefinite, note of time in John (3:22; strkjv@5:1; strkjv@6:1; strkjv@7:1|). The phrase does not mean immediate sequence of events. As a matter of fact, a whole year may intervene between the events of chapter 5 in Jerusalem and those in chapter 6 in Galilee. There is no sufficient reason for believing that chapter 6 originally preceded chapter 5. The feeding of the five thousand is the only event before the last visit to Jerusalem recorded in all Four Gospels (Mark:6:30-44; strkjv@Matthew:14:13-21; strkjv@Luke:9:10-17; strkjv@John:6:1-13|). The disciples have returned from the tour of Galilee and report to Jesus. It was the passover time (John:6:4|) just a year before the end. {To the other side of the Sea of Galilee} (\peran ts thalasss ts Galilaias\). The name given in Mark and Matthew. It is called Gennesaret in strkjv@Luke:5:1| and "Sea of Tiberias" in strkjv@John:21:1|. Here "of Tiberias" (\ts Tiberiados\) is added as further description. Herod Antipas A.D. 22 built Tiberias to the west of the Sea of Galilee and made it his capital. See verse 23| for this city. Luke (Luke:9:10|) explains that it was the eastern Bethsaida (Julias) to which Jesus took the disciples, not the western Bethsaida of strkjv@Mark:6:45| in Galilee.
rwp@John:7:1 @{After these things} (\meta tauta\). John's favourite general note of the order of events. Bernard conceives that the events in strkjv@7:1-14| follow strkjv@7:15-24| and both follow chapter 5, not chapter 6, a wholly needless readjustment of the narrative to suit a preconceived theory. John simply supplements the narrative in the Synoptics at points deemed important. He now skips the period of withdrawal from Galilee of about six months (from passover to tabernacles). {Walked} (\periepatei\). Imperfect active, a literal picture of the itinerant ministry of Jesus. He has returned to Galilee from the region of Caesarea Philippi. He had been avoiding Galilee as well as Judea for six months. {For he would not walk in Judea} (\ou gar thelen en ti Ioudaii\). Imperfect active of \thel\ picturing the attitude of refusal to work in Judea after the events in chapter 5 (perhaps a year and a half before). {Sought to kill} (\eztoun apokteinai\). Imperfect active again, progressive attitude, had been seeking to kill him as shown in strkjv@5:18| where the same words occur.
rwp@John:7:11 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). The hostile leaders in Jerusalem, not the Galilean crowds (7:12|) nor the populace in Jerusalem (7:25|). {Sought} (\eztoun\). Imperfect active of \zte\, "were seeking," picture of the attitude of the Jewish leaders toward Jesus who had not yet appeared in public at the feast. In fact he had avoided Jerusalem since the collision in chapter 5. The leaders clearly wished to attack him. {Where is he?} (\pou estin ekeinos;\). "Where is that one? (emphatic use of \ekeinos\ as in strkjv@1:8; strkjv@9:12|). Jesus had been at two feasts during his ministry (passover in strkjv@2:12ff.|; possibly another passover in strkjv@5:1|), but he had avoided the preceding passover (6:4; strkjv@7:1|). The leaders in Jerusalem had kept in touch with Christ's work in Galilee. They anticipate a crisis in Jerusalem.
rwp@John:7:20 @{The multitude} (\ho ochlos\). Outside of Jerusalem (the Galilean crowd as in verses 11f.|) and so unfamiliar with the effort to kill Jesus recorded in strkjv@5:18|. It is important in this chapter to distinguish clearly the several groups like the Jewish leaders (7:13,15,25,26,30,32|, etc.), the multitude from Galilee and elsewhere (10-13,20,31,40,49|), the common people of Jerusalem (25|), the Roman soldiers (45f.|). {Thou hast a devil} (\daimonion echeis\). "Demon," of course, as always in the Gospels. These pilgrims make the same charge against Jesus made long ago by the Pharisees in Jerusalem in explanation of the difference between John and Jesus (Matthew:11:18; strkjv@Luke:7:33|). It is an easy way to make a fling like that. "He is a monomaniac labouring under a hallucination that people wish to kill him" (Dods).
rwp@John:7:22 @{For this cause} (\dia touto\). Some would take this phrase with the preceding verb \thaumazete\ (ye marvel for this cause). {Hath given} (\dedken\). Present active indicative of \didmi\ (permanent state). {Not that it is of Moses, but of the fathers} (\ouch hoti ek tou Muses estin all' ek tn patern\). A parenthesis to explain that circumcision is older in origin than Moses. {And on the sabbath ye circumcise} (\kai en sabbati peritemnete\). Adversative use of \kai\=and yet as in 19|. That is to say, the Jews keep one law (circumcision) by violating another (on the Sabbath, the charge against him in chapter 5, healing on the Sabbath).
rwp@John:7:29 @{I know him} (\eg oida auton\). In contrast to the ignorance of these people. See the same words in strkjv@8:55| and the same claim in strkjv@17:25; strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@Luke:10:22| (the Johannine aerolite). "These three words contain the unique claim of Jesus, which is pressed all through the chapters of controversy with the Jews" (Bernard). Jesus is the Interpreter of God to men (John:1:18|). {And he sent me} (\kakeinos me apesteilen\). First aorist active indicative of \apostell\, the very verb used of Jesus when he sent forth the twelve (Matthew:10:5|) and used by Jesus again of himself in strkjv@John:17:3|. He is the Father's Apostle to men.
rwp@John:7:50 @{Nicodemus} (\Nikodmos\). Not heard from since chapter 3 when he timidly came to Jesus by night. Now he boldly protests against the injustice of condemning Jesus unheard. He appears once more (and only in John) in strkjv@19:39| with Joseph of Arimathea as a secret disciple of Jesus. He is a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin and his present act is courageous. {Saith} (\legei\). Dramatic present active indicative as in strkjv@2:3|. {Before} (\proteron\). This is genuine, a reference to the visit in chapter 3, but \nuktos\ (by night) is not genuine here. {Being one of them} (\heis n ex autn\). As a member of the Sanhedrin he takes up the challenge in verse 48|. He is both ruler and Pharisee.
rwp@John:8:2 @{Early in the morning} (\orthrou\). Genitive of time, \orthros\ meaning daybreak, old word, not in John, though in strkjv@Luke:24:1; strkjv@Acts:5:21|. John uses \pri\ (18:28; strkjv@20:1; strkjv@21:4|). {He came again into the temple} (\palin paregeneto eis to hieron\). If the paragraph is genuine, the time is the next day after the eighth and last day of the feast. If not genuine, there is no way of telling the time of this apparently true incident. {And all the people came unto him} (\kai ps ho laos rcheto pros auton\). Imperfect middle of \erchomai\ picturing the enthusiasm of the whole (\pas\) crowd now as opposed to the divisions in chapter 7. {Taught} (\edidasken\). Imperfect active of \didask\. He took his seat (\kathisas\, ingressive active participle of \kathiz\) as was customary for Jesus and began to teach (inchoative imperfect). Songs:the picture.
rwp@John:9:1 @{As he passed by} (\paragn\). Present active participle of \parag\, old verb to go along, by, or past (Matthew:20:30|). Only example in this Gospel, but in strkjv@1John:2:8,17|. The day was after the stirring scenes in chapter 8, but not at the feast of dedication as Westcott argues. That comes three months later (10:22|). {From his birth} (\ek genets\). Ablative case with \ek\ of old word from \gen, ginomai\. Here alone in N.T., but the phrase \tuphlos ek genets\ is common in Greek writers. Probably a well-known character with his stand as a beggar (verse 5|).
rwp@John:9:6 @{He spat on the ground} (\eptusen chamai\). First aorist active indicative of the old verb \ptu\ for which see strkjv@Mark:7:33|. \Chamai\ is an old adverb either in the dative or locative (sense suits locative), in N.T. only here and strkjv@John:18:6|. Jesus was not asked to cure this man. The curative effects of saliva are held in many places. The Jews held saliva efficacious for eye-trouble, but it was forbidden on the Sabbath. "That Jesus supposed some virtue lay in the application of the clay is contradicted by the fact that in other cases of blindness He did not use it" (Dods). Cf. strkjv@Mark:8:23|. Why he here accommodated himself to current belief we do not know unless it was to encourage the man to believe. {He made clay} (\epoisen plon\). Only use of \plos\, old word for clay, in N.T. in this chapter and strkjv@Romans:9:21|. The kneading of the clay and spittle added another offence against the Sabbath rules of the rabbis. {Anointed his eyes with the clay} (\epechrisen autou ton plon epi tous ophthalmous\). First aorist active indicative of \epichri\, old verb, to spread on, anoint, here only and verse 11| in N.T. "He spread the clay upon his eyes." B C read \epethken\ (first aorist active indicative of \epitithmi\, to put on).
rwp@John:10:22 @{And it was the feast of the dedication at Jerusalem} (\egeneto de ta enkainia en tois Ierosolumois\). But Westcott and Hort read \tote\ (then) instead of \de\ (and) on the authority of B L W 33 and some versions. This is probably correct: "At that time came the feast of dedication in Jerusalem." \Tote\ does not mean that the preceding events followed immediately after the incidents in strkjv@10:1-21|. Bernard brings chapter 9 up to this date (possibly also chapter 8) and rearranges chapter 10 in a purely arbitrary way. There is no real reason for this arrangement. Clearly there is a considerable lapse between the events in strkjv@10:22-39| and strkjv@10:1-21|, possibly nearly three months (from just after tabernacles strkjv@7:37| to dedication strkjv@10:22|). The Pharisees greet his return with the same desire to catch him. This feast of dedication, celebrated for eight days about the middle of our December, was instituted by Judas Maccabeus B.C. 164 in commemoration of the cleansing of the temple from the defilements of pagan worship by Antiochus Epiphanes (1Macc. strkjv@4:59). The word \enkainia\ (\en\, \kainos\, new) occurs here only in the N.T. It was not one of the great feasts and could be observed elsewhere without coming to Jerusalem. Jesus had apparently spent the time between tabernacles and dedication in Judea (Luke:10:1-13:21|). {Winter} (\cheimn\). Old word from \cheima\ (\che\, to pour, rain, or from \chin\, snow). See strkjv@Matthew:24:20|.
rwp@John:10:32 @{From the Father} (\ek tou patros\). Proceeding out of the Father as in strkjv@6:65; strkjv@16:28| (cf. strkjv@7:17; strkjv@8:42,47|) rather than \para\ as in strkjv@1:14; strkjv@6:46; strkjv@7:29; strkjv@17:7|. {For which of those works} (\dia poion autn ergon\). Literally, "For what kind of work of them" (referring to the "many good works" \polla erga kala\). Noble and beautiful deeds Jesus had done in Jerusalem like healing the impotent man (chapter 5) and the blind man (chapter 9). \Poion\ is a qualitative interrogative pronoun pointing to \kala\ (good). {Do ye stone me} (\lithazete\). Conative present active indicative, "are ye trying to stone me." They had the stones in their hands stretched back to fling at him, a threatening attitude.
rwp@John:11:2 @{And it was that Mary which anointed the Lord with ointment, and wiped his feet with her hair} (\n de Mariam h aleipsasa ton kurion muri kai ekmaxasa tous podas autou tais thrixin auts\). This description is added to make plainer who Mary is "whose brother Lazarus was sick" (\hs ho adelphos Lazaros sthenei\). There is an evident proleptic allusion to the incident described by John in strkjv@12:1-8| just after chapter 11. As John looks back from the end of the century it was all behind him, though the anointing (\h aleipsasa\, first aorist active articular participle of \aleiph\, old verb for which see strkjv@Mark:6:13|) took place after the events in chapter 11. The aorist participle is timeless and merely pictures the punctiliar act. The same remark applies to \ekmaxasa\, old verb \ekmass\, to wipe off or away (Isaiah:12:3; strkjv@13:5; strkjv@Luke:7:38,44|). Note the Aramaic form \Mariam\ as usual in John, but \Marias\ in verse 1|. When John wrote, it was as Jesus had foretold (Matthew:26:13|), for the fame of Mary of Bethany rested on the incident of the anointing of Jesus. The effort to link Mary of Bethany with Mary Magdalene and then both names with the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7:36-50| is gratuitous and to my mind grotesque and cruel to the memory of both Mary of Bethany and Mary Magdalene. Bernard may be taken as a specimen: "The conclusion is inevitable that John (or his editor) regarded Mary of Bethany as the same person who is described by Luke as \hamartlos\." This critical and artistic heresy has already been discussed in Vol. II on Luke's Gospel. Suffice it here to say that Luke introduces Mary Magdalene as an entirely new character in strkjv@8:2| and that the details in strkjv@Luke:7:36-50; strkjv@John:12:1-8| have only superficial resemblances and serious disagreements. John is not here alluding to Luke's record, but preparing for his own in chapter 12. What earthly difficulty is there in two different women under wholly different circumstances doing a similar act for utterly different purposes?
rwp@John:11:37 @{Could not this man} (\ouk edunato houtos\). Imperfect middle of \dunamai\. They do not say \dunatai\ (can, present middle indicative). But clearly the opening of the blind man's eyes (chapter 9) had made a lasting impression on some of these Jews, for it was done three months ago. {Have caused that this man also should not die} (\poisai hina kai houtos m apothani\). First aorist active infinitive of \poie\ with \hina\, like the Latin _facere ut_ (sub-final use, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 985), with the second aorist active subjunctive \apothani\ and negative \m\. These Jews share the view expressed by Martha (verse 21|) and Mary (verse 32|) that Jesus could have {prevented} the death of Lazarus.
rwp@John:12:2 @{Songs:they made him a supper there} (\epoisan oun auti deipnon ekei\). Here again \oun\ is not inferential, but merely transitional. This supper is given by Mark (Mark:14:3-9|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6-13|) just two days (Mark:14:1|) before the passover, that is on our Tuesday evening (beginning of Jewish Wednesday), while John mentions (12:2-9|) it immediately after the arrival of Jesus in Bethany (12:1|). One must decide which date to follow. Mark and Matthew and Luke follow it with the visit of Judas to the Sanhedrin with an offer to betray Jesus as if exasperated by the rebuke by Jesus at the feast. Bernard considers that John "is here more probably accurate." It all turns on John's purpose in putting it here. This is the last mention of Jesus in Bethany and he may have mentioned it proleptically for that reason as seems to me quite reasonable. Westcott notes that in chapter 12 John closes his record of the public ministry of the Lord relative to the disciples at this feast (1-11|), to the multitude in the triumphal entry (12-19|), to the world outside in the visit of the Greeks (20-36a|), and with two summary judgements (36b-50|). There is no further reason to refer to the feast in the house of another Simon when a sinful woman anointed Jesus (Luke:7:36-50|). It is no credit to Luke or to John with Mark and Matthew to have them all making a jumble like that. There were two anointings by two absolutely different women for wholly different purposes. See the discussion on Luke for further details. {And Martha served} (\kai h Martha dikonei\). Imperfect active of \diakone\, picturing Martha true to the account of her in strkjv@Luke:10:40| (\polln diakonian\, \diakonein\ as here). But this fact does not show that Martha was the wife of this Simon at all. They were friends and neighbours and Martha was following her bent. It is Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (Matthew:26:6|) who mention the name of the host. It is not Simon the Pharisee (Luke:7:36|), but Simon the leper (Mark:14:3; strkjv@Matthew:26:6|) in whose house they meet. The name is common enough. The Simon in Luke was sharply critical of Jesus; this one is full of gratitude for what Jesus has done for him. {That sat at meat} (\tn anakeimenn\). "That lay back," reclined as they did, articular participle (ablative case after \ek\) of the common verb \anakeimai\. Perhaps Simon gave the feast partly in honour of Lazarus as well as of Jesus since all were now talking of both (John:12:9|). It was a gracious occasion. The guests were Jesus, the twelve apostles, and Martha, Mary, and Lazarus.
rwp@John:13:1 @{Now before the feast of the passover} (\pro de ts heorts tou pascha\). Just before, John means, not twenty-four hours before, that is our Thursday evening (beginning of 15th of Nisan, sunset to sunset Jewish day), since Jesus was crucified on Friday 15th of Nisan. Hence Jesus ate the regular passover meal at the usual time. The whole feast, including the feast of unleavened bread, lasted eight days. For a discussion of the objections to this interpretation of John in connexion with the Synoptic Gospels one may consult my _Harmony of the Gospels_, pp. 279-84, and David Smith's _In the Days of His Flesh_, Appendix VIII. The passover feast began on the 15th Nisan at sunset, the passover lamb being slain the afternoon of 14th Nisan. There seems no real doubt that this meal in strkjv@John:13:1-30| is the real passover meal described by the Synoptics also (Mark:14:18-21; strkjv@Matthew:26:21-25; strkjv@Luke:22:21-23|), followed by the institution of the Lord's Supper. Thus understood verse 1| here serves as an introduction to the great esoteric teaching of Christ to the apostles (John:13:2-17:26|), called by Barnas Sears _The Heart of Christ_. This phrase goes with the principal verb \gapsen\ (loved). {Knowing} (\eids\). Second perfect active participle, emphasizing the full consciousness of Christ. He was not stumbling into the dark as he faced "his hour" (\autou h hra\). See strkjv@18:4; strkjv@19:28| for other examples of the insight and foresight (Bernard) of Jesus concerning his death. See on strkjv@12:23| for use before by Jesus. {That he should depart} (\hina metabi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \metabain\, old word, to go from one place to another, here (5:24; strkjv@1John:3:14|) to go from this world (8:23|) back to the Father from whom he had come (14:12,28; strkjv@16:10,28; strkjv@17:5|). {His own which were in the world} (\tous idious tous en ti kosmi\). His own disciples (17:6,9,11|), those left in the world when he goes to the Father, not the Jews as in strkjv@1:11|. See strkjv@Acts:4:23; strkjv@1Timothy:5:8| for the idiom. John pictures here the outgoing of Christ's very heart's love (chs. strkjv@John:13-17|) towards these men whom he had chosen and whom he loved "unto the end" (\eis telos\) as in strkjv@Matthew:10:22; strkjv@Luke:18:15|, but here as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:16| rather "to the uttermost." The culmination of the crisis ("his hour") naturally drew out the fulness of Christ's love for them as is shown in these great chapters (John:13-17|).
rwp@John:14:20 @{In that day} (\en ekeini ti hmeri\). The New Dispensation of the Holy Spirit, beginning with Christ's Resurrection and the Coming of the Holy Spirit at pentecost. {Shall know} (\gnsesthe\). Future middle of \ginsk\. Chapters 1 to 3 of Acts bear eloquent witness to these words.
rwp@John:16:6 @{Sorrow hath filled} (\h lup peplrken\). This word is not used of Jesus in the Gospels, in John only in this chapter. Perfect active indicative of \plro\. They do not see their way to go on without Jesus.
rwp@John:20:31 @{Are written} (\gegraptai\). Perfect passive indicative of \graph\, "have been written" by John. {That ye may believe} (\hina pisteute\). Purpose with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \pisteu\, "that you may keep on believing." The book has had precisely this effect of continuous and successive confirmation of faith in Jesus Christ through the ages. {Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God} (\Isous estin ho Christos ho huios tou theou\). The man named Jesus is identical with the Messiah (the Anointed One) as opposed to the Cerinthian separation of the Jesus of history and the Christ (\aeon\) of theology. And the Docetic notion of a phantom body for Jesus with no actual human body is also false. Jesus is the Son of God with all that this high term implies, the Logos of strkjv@John:1:1-18| (the Prologue). "Very God of very God," Incarnate Revealer of God. But there is a further purpose. {And that believing ye may have life in his name} (\kai hina pisteuontes zn echte en ti onomati autou\). Note present participle \pisteuontes\ (continuing to believe) and the present active subjunctive \echte\ (keep on having). "Life" (\zn\) is eternal life so often mentioned in this Gospel, life to be found only in the name (and power) of Jesus Christ the Son of God. This verse constitutes a fitting close for this wonderful book and John may at first have intended to stop here. But before he published the work he added the Epilogue (Chapter XXI) which is written in the same style and gives a beautiful picture of the Risen Christ with a side-light on John and Peter (restored to fellowship).
rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE RELATION TO II PETER Beyond a doubt one of these Epistles was used by the other, as one can see by comparing particularly strkjv@Jude:1:3-18| and strkjv@2Peter:2:1-18|. As already said concerning II Peter, scholars are greatly divided on this point, and in our present state of knowledge it does not seem possible to reach a solid conclusion. The probability is that not much time elapsed between them. Mayor devotes a whole chapter to the discussion of the relation between II Peter and Jude:and reaches the conclusion "that in Jude:we have the first thought, in Peter the second thought." That is my own feeling, but it is all so subjective that I have no desire to urge the point unduly. Bigg is equally positive that II Peter comes before Jude.
rwp@Info_Luke @ THE AUTHOR OF ACTS A COMPANION OF PAUL The proof of this position belongs to the treatment of Acts, but a word is needed here. The use of "we" and "us" in strkjv@Acts:16:10 and from strkjv@Acts:20:6| to the end of chapter strkjv@Acts:28| shows it beyond controversy if the same man wrote the "we" sections and the rest of the Acts. This proof Harnack has produced with painstaking detail in his _Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_ and in his volume _The Acts of the Apostles_ and in his _Luke the Physician_.
rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL In his Preface or Prologue (Luke:1:1-4|) the author tells us that he had two kinds of sources, oral and written, and that they were many, how many we have no way of telling. It is now generally accepted that we know two of his written sources, Mark's Gospel and Q or the Logia of Jesus (written by Matthew, Papias says). Mark is still preserved and it is not difficult for any one by the use of a harmony of the Gospels to note how Luke made use of Mark, incorporating what he chose, adapting it in various ways, not using what did not suit his purposes. The other source we only know in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke, that is the material common to both, but not in Mark. This also can be noted by any one in a harmony. Only it is probable that this source was more extensive than just the portions used by both Matthew and Luke. It is probable that both Matthew and Luke each used portions of the Logia not used by the other. But there is a large portion of Luke's Gospel which is different from Mark and Matthew. Some scholars call this source L. There is little doubt that Luke had another document for the material peculiar to him, but it is also probable that he had several others. He spoke of "many." This applies especially to chapters 9 to 21. But Luke expressly says that he had received help from "eye-witnesses and ministers of the word," in oral form this means. It is, then, probable that Luke made numerous notes of such data and used them along with the written sources at his command. This remark applies particularly to chapters 1 and 2 which have a very distinct Semitic (Aramaic) colouring due to the sources used. It is possible, of course, that Mary the mother of Jesus may have written a statement concerning these important matters or that Luke may have had converse with her or with one of her circle. Ramsay, in his volume, _Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?_ shows the likelihood of Luke's contact with Mary or her circle during these two years at Caesarea. Luke handles the data acquired with care and skill as he claims in his Prologue and as the result shows. The outcome is what Renan called the most beautiful book in the world.
rwp@Luke:1:2 @{Even as} (\kaths\). This particle was condemned by the Atticists though occurring occasionally from Aristotle on. It is in the papyri. Luke asserts that the previous narratives had their sound basis. {Delivered unto us} (\paredsan hmin\). Second aorist active indicative of \paradidmi\. Luke received this tradition along with those who are mentioned above (the many). That is he was not one of the "eyewitnesses." He was a secondary, not a primary, witness of the events. Tradition has come to have a meaning of unreliability with us, but that is not the idea here. Luke means to say that the handing down was dependable, not mere wives' fables. Those who drew up the narratives had as sources of knowledge those who handed down the data. Here we have both written and oral sources. Luke had access to both kinds. {Which from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word} (\hoi ap' archs autoptai kai hupretai genomenoi tou logou\). "Who" is better than "which" for the article here. The word for {eyewitnesses} (\autoptai\) is an old Greek word and appears in the papyri also. It means seeing with one's own eyes. It occurs here only in the N.T. We have the very word in the medical term _autopsy_. Greek medical writers often had the word. It is a different word from \epoptai\ (eyewitness) in strkjv@2Peter:1:16|, a word used of those who beheld heavenly mysteries. The word for "ministers" (\hupretai\), under rowers or servants we have had already in strkjv@Matthew:5:25; strkjv@26:58; strkjv@Mark:14:54,65|, which see. We shall see it again in strkjv@Luke:4:20| of the attendant in the synagogue. In the sense of a preacher of the gospel as here, it occurs also in strkjv@Acts:26:16|. Here "the word" means the gospel message, as in strkjv@Acts:6:4; strkjv@8:4|, etc. {From the beginning} apparently refers to the beginning of the ministry of Jesus as was true of the apostles (Acts:1:22|) and of the early apostolic preaching (Acts:10:37-43|). The Gospel of Mark follows this plan. The Gospel of Luke goes behind this in chapters 1 and 2 as does Matthew in chapters 1 and 2. But Luke is not here referring to himself. The matters about the childhood of Jesus Christ would not form part of the traditional preaching for obvious reasons.
rwp@Luke:1:3 @{It seemed good to me also} (\edoxe kamoi\). A natural conclusion and justification of Luke's decision to write his narrative. They had ample reason to draw up their narratives. Luke has more reason to do so because of his fuller knowledge and wider scope. {Having traced the course of all things} (\parkolouthkoti psin\). The perfect active participle of a common verb of the ancient Greek. Literally it means to follow along a thing in mind, to trace carefully. Both meanings occur abundantly in the ancient Greek. Cadbury (Appendix C to _Beginnings of Christianity_, Vol. II, pp. 489ff.) objects to the translation "having traced" here as implying research which the word does not here mean. Milligan (_Vocabulary_) is somewhat impressed by this argument. See my discussion of the point in Chapter XVI of _Studies in the Text of the N.T._ (The Implications in Luke's Preface) where the point is made that Luke here claims fulness of knowledge before he began to write his book. He had the traditions of the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word and the narratives previously drawn up. Whether he was a personal contemporary with any or all of these events we do not know and it is not particularly pertinent. He had _mentally_ followed along by the side of these events. Galen used this verb for the investigation of symptoms. Luke got himself ready to write before he began by full and accurate knowledge of the subject. \Akribs\ (accurately) means going into minute details, from \akron\, the topmost point. And he did it {from the first} (\anthen\). He seems to refer to the matters in Chapters strkjv@1:5-2:52|, the Gospel of the Infancy. {In order} (\kathexs\). Chronological order in the main following Mark's general outline. But in strkjv@9:51-18:10| the order is often topical. He has made careful investigation and his work deserves serious consideration. {Most excellent Theophilus} (\kratiste Theophile\). The name means god-lover or god-beloved. He may have been a believer already. He was probably a Gentile. Ramsay holds that "most excellent" was a title like "Your Excellency" and shows that he held office, perhaps a Knight. Songs:of Felix (Acts:23:26|) and Festus (Acts:26:25|). The adjective does not occur in the dedication in strkjv@Acts:1:1|.
rwp@Luke:1:5 @{There was} (\egeneto\). Not the usual \en\ for "was," but there arose or came into notice. With this verse the literary _Koin_ of verses 1 to 4 disappears. To the end of chapter 2 we have the most Hebraistic (Aramaic) passage in Luke's writings, due evidently to the use of documents or notes of oral tradition. Plummer notes a series of such documents ending with strkjv@1:80, strkjv@2:40, strkjv@2:52|. If the mother of Jesus was still alive, Luke could have seen her. She may have written in Aramaic an account of these great events. Natural reserve would keep her from telling too much and from too early publicity. Luke, as a physician, would take special interest in her birth report. The supernatural aspects disturb only those who do not admit the real Incarnation of Jesus Christ and who are unable to believe that God is superior to nature and that the coming of the Son of God to earth justifies such miraculous manifestations of divine power. Luke tells his story from the standpoint of Mary as Matthew gives his from the standpoint of Joseph. The two supplement each other. We have here the earliest documentary evidence of the origins of Christianity that has come down to us (Plummer). {Herod, King of Judea} (\Hridou basiles ts Ioudaias\). This note of time locates the events before the death of Herod the Great (as he was called later), appointed King of Judea by the Roman Senate B.C. 40 at the suggestion of Octavius and Antony. He died B.C. 4. {Of the course of Abijah} (\ex ephmerias Abia\). Not in old Greek, but in LXX and modern Greek. Papyri have a verb derived from it, \ephmere\. Daily service (Nehemiah:13:30; strkjv@1Chronicles:25:8|) and then a course of priests who were on duty for a week (1Chronicles:23:6; strkjv@28:13|). There were 24 such courses and that of Abijah was the eighth (1Chronicles:24:10; strkjv@2Chronicles:8:14|). Only four of these courses (Jedaiah, Immer, Pashur, Harim) returned from Babylon, but these four were divided into twenty-four with the old names. Each of these courses did duty for eight days, sabbath to sabbath, twice a year. On sabbaths the whole course did duty. At the feast of tabernacles all twenty-four courses were present. {Of the daughters of Aaron} (\ek tn thugatern Aarn\). "To be a priest and married to a priest's daughter was a double distinction" (Plummer). Like a preacher married to a preacher's daughter.
rwp@Luke:2:23 @{In the law of the Lord} (\en nomi Kuriou\). No articles, but definite by preposition and genitive. Vincent notes that "law" occurs in this chapter five times. Paul (Gal strkjv@4:4|) will urge that Jesus "was made under the law" as Luke here explains. The law did not require that the child be brought to Jerusalem. The purification concerned the mother, the presentation the son.
rwp@Luke:2:32 @{Revelation to the Gentiles} (\apokalupsin ethnn\). Objective genitive. The Messiah is to be light (\phs\) for the Gentiles in darkness (1:70|) and glory (\doxa\) for Israel (cf. strkjv@Romans:9:1-5; strkjv@Isaiah:49:6|). The word \ethnos\ originally meant just a crowd or company, then a race or nation, then the nations other than Israel (the people, \ho laos\) or the people of God. The word Gentile is Latin from _gens_, a tribe or nation. But the world-wide mission of the Messiah comes out clearly in these early chapters in Luke.
rwp@Luke:3:2 @{The Word of God came unto John} (\egeneto rhma theou epi Iann\). The great epoch marked by \egeneto\ rather than \n\. \Rhma theou\ is some particular utterance of God (Plummer), common in LXX, here alone in the N.T. Then John is introduced as the son of Zacharias according to Chapter 1. Matthew describes him as the Baptist, Mark as the Baptizer. No other Gospel mentions Zacharias. Mark begins his Gospel here, but Matthew and Luke have two Infancy Chapters before. Luke alone tells of the coming of the word to John. All three Synoptics locate him "in the wilderness" (\en ti ermi\) as here, strkjv@Mark:1:4; strkjv@Matthew:3:1| (adding "of Judea").
rwp@Luke:6:17 @{He came down with them} (\katabas met' autn\). Second aorist active participle of \katabain\, common verb. This was the night of prayer up in the mountain (Mark:31:3; strkjv@Luke:6:12|) and the choice of the Twelve next morning. The going up into the mountain of strkjv@Matthew:5:1| may simply be a summary statement with no mention of what Luke has explained or may be a reference to the elevation, where he "sat down" (Matthew:5:1|), above the plain or "level place" (\epi topou pedinou\) on the mountain side where Jesus "stood" or "stopped" (\est\). It may be a level place towards the foot of the mountain. He stopped his descent at this level place and then found a slight elevation on the mountain side and began to speak. There is not the slightest reason for making Matthew locate this sermon on the mountain and Luke in the valley as if the places, audiences, and topics were different. For the unity of the sermon see discussion on ¯Matthew:5:1f|. The reports in Matthew and Luke begin alike, cover the same general ground and end alike. The report in Matthew is longer chiefly because in Chapter 5, he gives the argument showing the contrast between Christ's conception of righteousness and that of the Jewish rabbis. Undoubtedly, Jesus repeated many of the crisp sayings here at other times as in Luke 12, but it is quite gratuitous to argue that Matthew and Luke have made up this sermon out of isolated sayings of Christ at various times. Both Matthew and Luke give too much that is local of place and audience for that idea. strkjv@Matthew:5:1| speaks of "the multitudes" and "his disciples." strkjv@Luke:6:17| notes "a great multitude of his disciples, and a great number of the people from all Judea and Jerusalem, and the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon." They agree in the presence of disciples and crowds besides the disciples from whom the twelve apostles were chosen. It is important to note how already people were coming from "the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon" "to hear him and to be healed (\iathnai\, first aorist passive of \iaomai\) of their diseases."
rwp@Luke:6:44 @{Is known} (\ginsketai\). The fruit of each tree reveals its actual character. It is the final test. This sentence is not in strkjv@Matthew:7:17-20|, but the same idea is in the repeated saying (Matthew:7:16,20|): "By their fruits ye shall know them," where the verb {epignsesthe} means full knowledge. The question in strkjv@Matthew:7:16| is put here in positive declarative form. The verb is in the plural for "men" or "people," \sullegousin\. See on ¯Matthew:7:16|. {Bramble bush} (\batou\). Old word, quoted from the LXX in strkjv@Mark:12:26; strkjv@Luke:20:37| (from strkjv@Exodus:3:6|) about the burning bush that Moses saw, and by Stephen (Acts:7:30,35|) referring to the same incident. Nowhere else in the N.T. "Galen has a chapter on its medicinal uses, and the medical writings abound in prescriptions of which it is an ingredient" (Vincent). {Gather} (\trugsin\). A verb common in Greek writers for gathering ripe fruit. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:14:18f|. {Grapes} (\staphuln\). Cluster of grapes.
rwp@Luke:7:1 @{After} (\epeid, epei and d\). This conjunction was written \epei d\ in Homer and is simple \epei\ with the intensive \d\ added and even \epei d per\ once in N.T. (Luke:1:1|). This is the only instance of the temporal use of \epeid\ in the N.T. The causal sense occurs only in Luke and Paul, for \epei\ is the correct text in strkjv@Matthew:21:46|. {Had ended} (\eplrsen\). First aorist active indicative. There is here a reference to the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount, but with nothing concerning the impression produced by the discourse such as is seen in strkjv@Matthew:7:28|. This verse really belongs as the conclusion of Chapter 6, not as the beginning of Chapter 7. {In the ears of the people} (\eis tas akoas tou laou\). \Ako\ from \akou\, to hear, is used of the sense of hearing (1Corinthians:12:17|), the ear with which one hears (Mark:7:35; strkjv@Hebrews:5:11|), the thing heard or the report (Rom strkjv@10:16|) or oral instruction (Galatians:3:2,5|). Both strkjv@Matthew:8:5-13; strkjv@Luke:7:1-10| locate the healing of the centurion's servant in Capernaum where Jesus was after the Sermon on the Mount.
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:15:17 @{But when he came to himself} (\eis heauton de elthn\). As if he had been far from himself as he was from home. As a matter of fact he had been away, out of his head, and now began to see things as they really were. Plato is quoted by Ackerman (_Christian Element in Plato_) as thinking of redemption as coming to oneself. {Hired servants} (\misthioi\). A late word from \misthos\ (hire). In the N.T. only in this chapter. The use of "many" here suggests a wealthy and luxurious home. {Have bread enough and to spare} (\perisseuontai artn\). Old verb from \perissos\ and that from \peri\ (around). Present passive here, "are surrounded by loaves" like a flood. {I perish} (\eg de limi hde apollumai\). Every word here counts: While I on the other hand am here perishing with hunger. It is the linear present middle of \apollumi\. Note \eg\ expressed and \de\ of contrast.
rwp@Luke:16:1 @{Unto the disciples} (\kai pros tous mathtas\). The three preceding parables in chapter 15 exposed the special faults of the Pharisees, "their hard exclusiveness, self-righteousness, and contempt for others" (Plummer). This parable is given by Luke alone. The \kai\ (also) is not translated in the Revised Version. It seems to mean that at this same time, after speaking to the Pharisees (chapter 15), Jesus proceeds to speak a parable to the disciples (16:1-13|), the parable of the Unjust Steward. It is a hard parable to explain, but Jesus opens the door by the key in verse 9|. {Which had a steward} (\hos ichen oikonomon\). Imperfect active, continued to have. Steward is house-manager or overseer of an estate as already seen in strkjv@Luke:12:42|. {Was accused} (\dieblth\). First aorist indicative passive, of \diaball\, an old verb, but here only in the N.T. It means to throw across or back and forth, rocks or words and so to slander by gossip. The word implies malice even if the thing said is true. The word \diabolos\ (slanderer) is this same root and it is used even of women, she-devils (1Timothy:3:11|). {That he was wasting} (\hs diaskorpizn\). For the verb see on ¯15:13|. The use of \hs\ with the participle is a fine Greek idiom for giving the alleged ground of a charge against one. {His goods} (\ta huparchonta autou\). "His belongings," a Lukan idiom.
rwp@Luke:24:3 @{Of the Lord Jesus} (\tou kuriou Isou\). The Western family of documents does not have these words and Westcott and Hort bracket them as Western non-interpolations. There are numerous instances of this shorter Western text in this chapter. For a discussion of the subject see my _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament_, pp. 225-237. This precise combination (the Lord Jesus) is common in the Acts, but nowhere else in the Gospels.
rwp@Luke:24:12 @This entire verse is a Western non-interpolation. This incident is given in complete form in strkjv@John:18:2-10| and most of the words in this verse are there also. It is of a piece with many items in this chapter about which it is not easy to reach a final conclusion. {Stooping and looking in} (\parakupsas\). First aorist active participle of \parakupt\, to stoop besides and peer into. Old verb used also in strkjv@John:20:5,11; strkjv@James:1:25; strkjv@1Peter:1:12|. {By themselves} (\mona\). Without the body. {To his home} (\pros hauton\). Literally, "to himself."
rwp@Mark:5:35 @{While he yet spake} (\Eti autou lalountos\). Genitive absolute. Another vivid touch in Mark and strkjv@Luke:8:49|. The phrase is in strkjv@Genesis:29:9|. Nowhere does Mark preserve better the lifelike traits of an eyewitness like Peter than in these incidents in chapter 5. The arrival of the messengers from Jairus was opportune for the woman just healed of the issue of blood (\en husei haimatos\) for it diverted attention from her. Now the ruler's daughter has died (\apethane\). {Why troublest thou the master any further?} (\Ti eti skulleis ton didaskalon;\). It was all over, so they felt. Jesus had raised from the dead the son of the widow of Nain (Luke:7:11-17|), but people in general did not expect him to raise the dead. The word \skull\, from \skulon\ (_skin, pelt, spoils_), means to skin, to flay, in Aeschylus. Then it comes to mean to vex, annoy, distress as in strkjv@Matthew:9:36|, which see. The middle is common in the papyri for bother, worry, as in strkjv@Luke:7:6|. There was no further use in troubling the Teacher about the girl.
rwp@Mark:8:38 @{For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and my words} (\hos gar ean epaischunthi me kai tous emous logous\). More exactly, {whosoever is ashamed} (first aorist passive subjunctive with indefinite relative and \ean = an\. See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 957-9. It is not a statement about the future conduct of one, but about his present attitude toward Jesus. The conduct of men toward Christ now determines Christ's conduct then (\epaischunthsetai\, first future passive indicative). This passive verb is transitive and uses the accusative (\me, auton\). {In this adulterous and sinful generation} (\en ti genei tauti ti moichalidi kai hamartli\). Only in Mark. {When he cometh} (\hotan elthi\). Aorist active subjunctive with reference to the future second coming of Christ with the glory of the Father with his holy angels (cf. strkjv@Matthew:16:27|). This is a clear prediction of the final eschatological coming of Christ. This verse could not be separated from strkjv@Mark:9:1| as the chapter division does. These two verses in strkjv@Mark:8:38; strkjv@9:1| form one paragraph and should go together.
rwp@Mark:13:4 @{Tell us, when shall these things be?} (\Eipon hmin pote tauta estai;\). The Revised Version punctuates it as a direct question, but Westcott and Hort as an indirect inquiry. They asked about the {when} (\pote\) and the {what sign} (\ti smeion\). strkjv@Matthew:24:3| includes "the sign of thy coming and the end of the world," showing that these tragic events are brought before Jesus by the disciples. See discussion of the interpretation of this discourse on ¯Matthew:24:3|. This chapter in Mark is often called "The Little Apocalypse" with the notion that a Jewish apocalypse has been here adapted by Mark and attributed to Jesus. Many of the theories attribute grave error to Jesus or to the Gospels on this subject. The view adopted in the discussion in Matthew is the one suggested here, that Jesus blended in one picture his death, the destruction of Jerusalem within that generation, the second coming and end of the world typified by the destruction of the city. The lines between these topics are not sharply drawn in the report and it is not possible for us to separate the topics clearly. This great discourse is the longest preserved in Mark and may be due to Peter. Mark may have given it in order "to forewarn and forearm" (Bruce) the readers against the coming catastrophe of the destruction of Jerusalem. Both Matthew (Matthew:24|) and Luke (Luke:21:5-36|) follow the general line of Mark 13 though strkjv@Matthew:24:43-25:46| presents new material (parables).
rwp@Mark:16:8 @{Had come upon them} (\eichen autas\). Imperfect tense, more exactly, {held them, was holding them fast}. {Trembling and astonishment} (\tromos kai ekstasis\, trembling and ecstasy), Mark has it, while strkjv@Matthew:28:8| has "with fear and great joy" which see for discussion. Clearly and naturally their emotions were mixed. {They said nothing to any one} (\oudeni ouden eipan\). This excitement was too great for ordinary conversation. strkjv@Matthew:28:8| notes that they "ran to bring his disciples word." Hushed to silence their feet had wings as they flew on. {For they were afraid} (\ephobounto gar\). Imperfect tense. The continued fear explains their continued silence. At this point Aleph and B, the two oldest and best Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, stop with this verse. Three Armenian MSS. also end here. Some documents (cursive 274 and Old Latin k) have a shorter ending than the usual long one. The great mass of the documents have the long ending seen in the English versions. Some have both the long and the short endings, like L, Psi, 0112, 099, 579, two Bohairic MSS; the Harklean Syriac (long one in the text, short one in the Greek margin). One Armenian MS. (at Edschmiadzin) gives the long ending and attributes it to Ariston (possibly the Aristion of Papias). W (the Washington Codex) has an additional verse in the long ending. Songs:the facts are very complicated, but argue strongly against the genuineness of verses 9-20| of Mark 16. There is little in these verses not in strkjv@Matthew:28|. It is difficult to believe that Mark ended his Gospel with verse 8| unless he was interrupted. A leaf or column may have been torn off at the end of the papyrus roll. The loss of the ending was treated in various ways. Some documents left it alone. Some added one ending, some another, some added both. A full discussion of the facts is found in the last chapter of my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_ and also in my _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament_, pp. 214-16.
rwp@Info_Matthew @ Matthew was in the habit of keeping accounts and it is quite possible that he took notes of the sayings of Jesus as he heard them. At any rate he gives much attention to the teachings of Jesus as, for instance, the Sermon on the Mount in chapters strkjv@Matthew:5-7|, the parables in strkjv@Matthew:13|, the denunciation of the Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23|, the great eschatological discourse in strkjv@Matthew:24; 25|. As a publican in Galilee he was not a narrow Jew and so we do not expect a book prejudiced in favor of the Jews and against the Gentiles. He does seem to show that Jesus is the Messiah of Jewish expectation and hope and so makes frequent quotations from the Old Testament by way of confirmation and illustration. There is no narrow nationalism in Matthew. Jesus is both the Messiah of the Jews and the Saviour of the world.
rwp@Matthew:1:2 @{Begat} (\egennsen\). This word comes, like some of the early chapters of Genesis, with regularity through verse 16, until the birth of Jesus is reached when there is a sudden change. The word itself does not always mean immediate parentage, but merely direct descent. In verse 16| we have "Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was begotten Jesus who is called Christ" (\ton Isph ton andra Marias ex hs egennth Isous ho legomenos Christos\). The article occurs here each time with the object of "begat," but not with the subject of the verb to distinguish sharply the proper names. In the case of David the King (1:6|) and Joseph the husband of Mary (1:16|) the article is repeated. The mention of the brethren of Judah (1:2|) and of both Phares and Zara (1:3|) may show that Matthew was not copying a family pedigree but making his own table. All the Greek manuscripts give verse 16| as above save the Ferrar Group of minuscules which are supported by the Sinaitic Syriac Version. Because of this fact Von Soden, whose text Moffatt translates, deliberately prints his text "_Jacob begat Jesus_" (\Isph de egennsen Isoun\). But the Sinaitic Syriac gives the Virgin Birth of Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:1:18-25|. Hence it is clear that "begat" here in strkjv@1:16| must merely mean line of descent or the text has been tampered with in order to get rid of the Virgin Birth idea, but it was left untouched in strkjv@1:18-25|. I have a full discussion of the problem in chapter XIV of _Studies in the Text of the New Testament_. The evidence as it now stands does not justify changing the text of the Greek uncials to suit the Sinaitic Syriac. The Virgin Birth of Jesus remains in strkjv@1:16|. The spelling of these Hebrew names in English is usually according to the Hebrew form, not the Greek. In the Greek itself the Hebrew spelling is often observed in violation of the Greek rules for the ending of words with no consonants save _n,r,s_. But the list is not spelled consistently in the Greek, now like the Hebrew as in Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, now like the Greek as in Judah, Solomon, Hezekiah, though the Hebrew style prevails.
rwp@Matthew:11:1 @{He departed thence to teach and preach} (\meteb ekeithen tou didaskein kai krussein\). In five instances (7:28; strkjv@11:1; strkjv@13:53; strkjv@19:1; strkjv@26:1|) after great discourses by Jesus "the transition to what follows is made with the formula, 'And it came to pass when Jesus had ended'" (McNeile). This is a wrong chapter division, for strkjv@11:1| belongs with the preceding section. "{Commanding}" (\diatassn\, complementary participle with \etelesen\), means giving orders in detail (\dia-\) for each of them. Note both "teach and preach" as in strkjv@4:23|. Where did Jesus go? Did he follow behind the twelve as he did with the seventy "whither he himself was about to come" (Luke:10:1|)? Bruce holds with Chrysostom that Jesus avoided the places where they were, giving them room and time to do their work. But, if Jesus himself went to the chief cities of Galilee on this tour, he would be compelled to touch many of the same points. Jesus would naturally follow behind at some distance. At the end of the tour the apostles come together in Capernaum and tell Jesus all that they had done and that they had taught (Mark:6:30|). Matthew follows the general outline of Mark, but the events are not grouped in chronological order here.
rwp@Matthew:11:3 @{He that cometh} (\ho erchomenos\). This phrase refers to the Messiah (Mark:11:9; strkjv@Luke:13:35; strkjv@19:38; strkjv@Hebrews:10:37; strkjv@Psalms:118:26; strkjv@Daniel:7:13|). Some rabbis applied the phrase to some forerunner of the kingdom (McNeile). Was there to be "another" (\heteron\) after Jesus? John had been in prison "long enough to develop a _prison mood_" (Bruce). It was once clear enough to him, but his environment was depressing and Jesus had done nothing to get him out of Machaerus (see chapter IX in my _John the Loyal_). John longed for reassurance.
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:13:13 @{Because seeing} (\hoti blepontes\). In the parallel passages in strkjv@Mark:4:12| and strkjv@Luke:8:10| we find \hina\ with the subjunctive. This does not necessarily mean that in Mark and Luke \hina=hoti\ with the causal sense, though a few rare instances of such usage may be found in late Greek. For a discussion of the problem see my chapter on "The Causal Use of _Hina_" in _Studies in Early Christianity_ (1928) edited by Prof. S.J. Case. Here in Matthew we have first "an adaptation of strkjv@Isaiah:6:9f.| which is quoted in full in v. 14f.|" (McNeile). Thus Matthew presents "a striking paradox, 'though they see, they do not (really) see'" (McNeile). Cf. strkjv@John:9:41|. The idiom here in Matthew gives no trouble save in comparison with Mark and Luke which will be discussed in due turn. The form \suniousin\ is an omega verb form (\suni\) rather than the \mi\ verb (\sunimi\) as is common in the _Koin_.
rwp@Matthew:24:1 @{Went out from the temple} (\exelthn apo tou hierou\). All the discourses since strkjv@Matthew:21:23| have been in the temple courts (\hieron\, the sacred enclosure). But now Jesus leaves it for good after the powerful denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees in chapter 23. His public teaching is over. It was a tragic moment. As he was going out (\eporeueto\, descriptive imperfect) the disciples, as if to relieve the thought of the Master came to him (\proslthon\) to show (\epideixai\, ingressive aorist infinitive) the buildings of the temple (\tas oikodomas tou hierou\). They were familiar to Jesus and the disciples, but beautiful like a snow mountain (Josephus, _Wars_ V,5,6), the monument that Herod the Great had begun and that was not yet complete (John:2:20|). Great stones were there of polished marble.
rwp@Matthew:24:3 @{As he sat} (\kathmenou\). Genitive absolute. Picture of Jesus sitting on the Mount of Olives looking down on Jerusalem and the temple which he had just left. After the climb up the mountain four of the disciples (Peter, James, John, Andrew) come to Jesus with the problem raised by his solemn words. They ask these questions about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, his own second coming (\parousia\, presence, common in the papyri for the visit of the emperor), and the end of the world. Did they think that they were all to take place simultaneously? There is no way to answer. At any rate Jesus treats all three in this great eschatological discourse, the most difficult problem in the Synoptic Gospels. Many theories are advanced that impugn the knowledge of Jesus or of the writers or of both. It is sufficient for our purpose to think of Jesus as using the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem which did happen in that generation in A.D. 70, as also a symbol of his own second coming and of the end of the world (\sunteleias tou ainos\) or consummation of the age. In a painting the artist by skilful perspective may give on the same surface the inside of a room, the fields outside the window, and the sky far beyond. Certainly in this discourse Jesus blends in apocalyptic language the background of his death on the cross, the coming destruction of Jerusalem, his own second coming and the end of the world. He now touches one, now the other. It is not easy for us to separate clearly the various items. It is enough if we get the picture as a whole as it is here drawn with its lessons of warning to be ready for his coming and the end. The destruction of Jerusalem came as he foretold. There are some who would date the Synoptic Gospels after A.D. 70 in order to avoid the predictive element involved in the earlier date. But that is to limit the fore-knowledge of Jesus to a merely human basis. The word \parousia\ occurs in this chapter alone (3,27,37,39|) in the Gospels, but often in the Epistles, either of presence as opposed to absence (Phillipians:2:12|) or the second coming of Christ (2Thessalonians:2:1|).
rwp@Matthew:28:19 @{All the nations} (\panta ta ethn\). Not just the Jews scattered among the Gentiles, but the Gentiles themselves in every land. And not by making Jews of them, though this point is not made plain here. It will take time for the disciples to grow into this _Magna Charta_ of the missionary propaganda. But here is the world program of the Risen Christ and it should not be forgotten by those who seek to foreshorten it all by saying that Jesus expected his second coming to be very soon, even within the lifetime of those who heard. He did promise to come, but he has never named the date. Meanwhile we are to be ready for his coming at any time and to look for it joyfully. But we are to leave that to the Father and push on the campaign for world conquest. This program includes making disciples or learners (\mathteusate\) such as they were themselves. That means evangelism in the fullest sense and not merely revival meetings. Baptism in (\eis\, not _into_) the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in the name of the Trinity. Objection is raised to this language in the mouth of Jesus as too theological and as not a genuine part of the Gospel of Matthew for the same reason. See strkjv@Matthew:11:27|, where Jesus speaks of the Father and the Son as here. But it is all to no purpose. There is a chapter devoted to this subject in my _The Christ of the Logia_ in which the genuineness of these words is proven. The name of Jesus is the essential part of it as is shown in the Acts. Trine immersion is not taught as the Greek Church holds and practices, baptism in the name of the Father, then of the Son, then of the Holy Spirit. The use of name (\onoma\) here is a common one in the Septuagint and the papyri for power or authority. For the use of \eis\ with \onoma\ in the sense here employed, not meaning _into_, see strkjv@Matthew:10:41f.| (cf. also strkjv@12:41|).
rwp@Revelation:1:19 @{Therefore} (\oun\). In view of Christ's words about himself in verse 18| and the command in verse 11|. {Which thou sawest} (\ha eides\). The vision of the Glorified Christ in verses 13-18|. {The things which are} (\ha eisin\). Plural verb (individualising the items) though \ha\ is neuter plural, certainly the messages to the seven churches (1:20-3:22|) in relation to the world in general, possibly also partly epexegetic or explanatory of \ha eides\. {The things which shall come to pass hereafter} (\ha mellei ginesthai meta tauta\). Present middle infinitive with \mellei\, though both aorist and future are also used. Singular verb here (\mellei\) blending in a single view the future. In a rough outline this part begins in strkjv@4:1 and goes to end of chapter 22, though the future appears also in chapters 2 and 3 and the present occurs in 4 to 22 and the elements in the vision of Christ (1:13-18|) reappear repeatedly.
rwp@Revelation:4:2 @{Straightway I was in the Spirit} (\euthes egenomn en pneumati\). But John had already "come to be in the Spirit" (1:10|, the very same phrase). Perhaps here effective aorist middle indicative while ingressive aorist in strkjv@1:10| (sequel or result, not entrance), "At once I found myself in the Spirit" (Swete), not "I came to be in the Spirit" as in strkjv@1:10|. {Was set} (\ekeito\). Imperfect middle of \keimai\, old verb, used as passive of \tithmi\. As the vision opens John sees the throne already in place as the first thing in heaven. This bold imagery comes chiefly from strkjv@1Kings:22:19; strkjv@Isaiah:6:1ff.; strkjv@Ezekiel:1:26-28; strkjv@Daniel:7:9f|. One should not forget that this language is glorious imagery, not actual objects in heaven. God is spirit. The picture of God on the throne is common in the O.T. and the N.T. (Matthew:5:34f.; strkjv@23:22; strkjv@Hebrews:1:3| and in nearly every chapter in the Revelation, strkjv@1:4|, etc.). The use of \kathmenos\ (sitting) for the name of God is like the Hebrew avoidance of the name _Jahweh_ and is distinguished from the Son in strkjv@6:16; strkjv@7:10|. {Upon the throne} (\epi ton thronon\). \Epi\ with the accusative, as in strkjv@4:4; strkjv@6:2,4f.; strkjv@11:16; strkjv@20:4|, but in verses 9,10, strkjv@4:1,7,13; strkjv@6:16; strkjv@7:15| we have \epi tou thronou\ (genitive), while in strkjv@7:10; strkjv@19:14; strkjv@21:5| we have \epi ti throni\ (locative) with no great distinction in the resultant idea.
rwp@Revelation:7:1 @{After this} (\meta touto\). Instead of the seventh seal (8:1|) being opened, two other episodes or preliminary visions occupy chapter 7 (the sealing of the servants of God strkjv@7:1-8| and the vision of the redeemed before the throne strkjv@7:9-17|). {Standing} (\hesttas\). Second perfect predicate participle of \histmi\, intransitive and followed by \epi\ and the accusative case \gnias\ as already in strkjv@3:20| (\epi thurian\) and often again (8:3| some MSS., others genitive; strkjv@11:11; strkjv@12:18; strkjv@14:1; strkjv@15:2|), but note \epi\ with genitive \thalasss\ in the next clause, like \epi kephals\ in strkjv@12:1; strkjv@7:3|. {Corners} (\gnias\). Old word for angle (Matthew:6:5|), also in strkjv@20:8|. {Holding} (\kratountas\). Present active participle of \krate\, to hold fast (Mark:7:3; strkjv@John:20:23|). The four winds (cf. strkjv@Matthew:24:31|) are held prisoner by angels at each of the four corners. Some Jews held the winds from due north, south, east, west to be favourable, while those from the angles (see strkjv@Acts:27:14|) were unfavourable (Charles). There is an angel of the fire (14:18|) and an angel of the waters (16:5|). {That no wind should blow} (\hina m pnei anemos\). Negative purpose clause with \hina m\ and the present active subjunctive, "lest a wind keep on blowing." {Upon any tree} (\epi pan dendron\). Accusative case here with \epi\ rather than the preceding genitives (\gs, thalasss\), "upon the land or upon the sea," but "against any tree" (picture of attack on the tree like a tornado's path).
rwp@Revelation:11:1 @{A reed} (\kalamos\). Old word for a growing reed (Matthew:11:7|) which grew in immense brakes in the Jordan valley, a writer's reed (3John:1:7|), a measuring-rod (here, strkjv@21:15f.; strkjv@Ezekiel:40:3-6; strkjv@42:16-19|). {Like a rod} (\homoios rabdi\). See strkjv@2:27; strkjv@Mark:6:8| for \rabdos\. {And one said} (\legn\). "Saying" (present active masculine participle of \leg\) is all that the Greek has. The participle implies \edken\ (he gave), not \edoth\, a harsh construction seen in strkjv@Genesis:22:20; strkjv@38:24|, etc. {Rise and measure} (\egeire kai metrson\). Present active imperative of \egeir\ (intransitive, exclamatory use as in strkjv@Mark:2:11|) and first aorist active imperative of \metre\. In strkjv@Ezekiel:42:2ff.| the prophet measures the temple and that passage is probably in mind here. But modern scholars do not know how to interpret this interlude (11:1-13|) before the seventh trumpet (11:15|). Some (Wellhausen) take it to be a scrap from the Zealot party before the destruction of Jerusalem, which event Christ also foretold (Mark:13:2; strkjv@Matthew:24:2; strkjv@Luke:21:6|) and which was also attributed to Stephen (Acts:6:14|). Charles denies any possible literal interpretation and takes the language in a wholly eschatological sense. There are three points in the interlude, however understood: the chastisement of Jerusalem or Israel (verses 1,2|), the mission of the two witnesses (3-12|), the rescue of the remnant (13|). There is a heavenly sanctuary (7:15; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@14:15|, etc.), but here \naos\ is on earth and yet not the actual temple in Jerusalem (unless so interpreted). Perhaps here it is the spiritual (3:12; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:4; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:16f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:16; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19ff.|). For altar (\thusiastrion\) see strkjv@8:3|. Perhaps measuring as applied to "them that worship therein" (\tous proskunountas en auti\) implies a word like numbering, with an allusion to the 144,000 in chapter 7 (a zeugma).
rwp@Revelation:12:5 @{She was delivered of a son} (\eteken huion\). Literally, "she bore a son" (second aorist active indicative of \tikt\). {A man child} (\arsen\). Songs:A C with the neuter \teknon\ or \paidion\ in mind, as often in O.T. (\eteken arsen\, strkjv@Exodus:1:16ff.; strkjv@2:2; strkjv@Leviticus:12:2,7; strkjv@Isaiah:66:7; strkjv@Jeremiah:20:15|, etc.), but P and some cursives read \arsena\ (masculine accusative), as in verse 13| (\ton arsena\), while Aleph Q have \arrena\. The word is old (either \arsn\ or \arrn\), as in strkjv@Matthew:19:4|, only in this chapter in the Apocalypse. It is really redundant after \huion\ (son), as in Tob. strkjv@6:12 (Aleph). {Who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron} (\hos mellei poimainein panta ta ethn en rabdi sidri\). See strkjv@2:27| for these words (from strkjv@Psalms:2:9|) applied there to victorious Christians also, and in strkjv@19:15| to the triumphant Christian. His rule will go beyond the Jews (Matthew:2:6|). There is here, of course, direct reference to the birth of Jesus from Mary, who thus represented in her person this "ideal woman" (God's people). {Was caught unto God} (\hrpasth\). First aorist passive indicative of \harpaz\, old verb for seizing or snatching away, as in strkjv@John:10:12|, here alone in the Apocalypse. Reference to the ascension of Christ, with omission of the ministry, crucifixion, and resurrection of Christ because he is here simply showing that "the Dragon's vigilance was futile" (Swete). "The Messiah, so far from being destroyed, is caught up to a share in God's throne" (Beckwith).
rwp@Revelation:14:14 @{A white cloud} (\nephel leuk\). Like the "bright cloud" of strkjv@Matthew:17:5| (Transfiguration), a familiar object in the Mediterranean lands. See strkjv@Daniel:7:13; strkjv@Matthew:24:30; strkjv@26:64; strkjv@Acts:1:9,11| for the picture of Christ's return. {I saw one sitting} (\kathmenon\). No \eidon\ here, but the accusative follows the \eidon\ at the beginning, as \nephel\ is nominative after \idou\, as in strkjv@4:1,4|. {Like unto a son of man} (\homoion huion anthrpou\). Accusative here after \homoion\ as in strkjv@1:13|, instead of the usual associative instrumental (13:4|). {Having} (\echn\). Nominative again after the \idou\ construction, just before, not after, \eidon\. {A golden crown} (\stephanon chrusoun\). Here a golden wreath, not the diadems of strkjv@19:12|. {A sharp sickle} (\drepanon oxu\). Old form \drepan\ (from \drep\, to pluck), pruning-hook, in N.T. only in this chapter and strkjv@Mark:4:29|. Christ is come for reaping this time (Hebrews:9:28|) for the harvesting of earth (verses 15-17|). The priesthood of Christ is the chief idea in strkjv@1:12-20| and "as the true _Imperator_" (Swete) in chapter strkjv@Revelation:19|.
rwp@Revelation:15:1 @{Another sign in heaven} (\allo smeion en ti ourani\). Looking back to strkjv@12:1,3|, after the series intervening. The Seven Bowls are parallel with the Seven Seals (ch. strkjv@Revelation:6|) and the Seven Trumpets (chapters strkjv@Revelation:8-11|), but there is an even closer connection with chapters strkjv@Revelation:12-14|, "the drama of the long conflict between the church and the world" (Swete). {Great and marvellous} (\mega kai thaumaston\). \Thaumastos\ is an old verbal adjective (from \thaumaz\, to wonder) and is already in strkjv@Matthew:21:42|. The wonder extends to the end of this vision or sign (16:21|). {Seven angels} (\aggelous hepta\). Accusative case in apposition with \smeion\ after \eidon\. Cf. strkjv@8:2|. {Which are the last} (\tas eschatas\). "Seven plagues the last." As in strkjv@21:9|, "the final cycle of such visitations" (Swete). {Is finished} (\etelesth\). Proleptic prophetic first aorist passive indicative of \tele\ as in strkjv@10:7|. The number seven seems particularly appropriate here for finality and completeness.
rwp@Revelation:16:13 @{Coming out of} (\ek\ alone, no participle \erchomena\). {Of the dragon} (\tou drakontos\). That is Satan (12:3,9|). {Of the beast} (\tou thriou\). The first beast (13:1,12|) and then just the beast (13:14ff.; strkjv@14:9,11; strkjv@15:2; strkjv@16:2,10|), the brute force of the World-power represented by the Roman Empire" (Swete). {Of the false prophet} (\tou pseudoprophtou\). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:7:15; strkjv@Acts:13:6; strkjv@1John:2:22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7|. Identified with the second beast (13:11-14|) in strkjv@19:20; strkjv@20:10|. Songs:the sixth bowl introduces the dragon and his two subalterns of chapters strkjv@Revelation:12; 13| (the two beasts). {Three unclean spirits} (\pneumata tria akatharta\). Out of the mouths of each of the three evil powers (the dragon and the two beasts) comes an evil spirit. See the use of mouth in strkjv@1:16| (9:17f.; strkjv@11:5; strkjv@12:15; strkjv@19:15,21|) as a chief seat of influence. In strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:8| we have "the breath of his mouth" (the other sense of \pneuma\). For \akatharton\ (unclean) with \pneuma\ see strkjv@Mark:1:23f.; strkjv@3:11; strkjv@5:2ff.; strkjv@Acts:5:16; strkjv@8:7|. Christ expelled unclean spirits, but His enemies send them forth" (Swete). See strkjv@Zechariah:13:2| "the false prophets and the unclean spirits." {As it were frogs} (\hs batrachoi\). Cf. strkjv@Exodus:8:5; strkjv@Leviticus:11:10ff|. Old word, here alone in N.T. Like loathsome frogs in form.
rwp@Revelation:19:7 @{Let us rejoice and be exceeding glad} (\chairmen kai agallimen\). Present active subjunctive (volitive) of \chair\ and \agallia\ (elsewhere in N.T. in the middle except strkjv@Luke:1:47; strkjv@1Peter:1:8|). For both verbs together see strkjv@Matthew:5:12|. {Let us give} (\dmen\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \didmi\, but A reads \dsomen\ (future active) and P \dsmen\. If the future indicative is read, the tone is changed from exhortation to declaration (we shall give glory unto him). {The marriage of the Lamb} (\ho gamos tou arniou\). In the O.T. God is the Bridegroom of Israel (Hosea:2:16; strkjv@Isaiah:54:6; strkjv@Ezekiel:16:7ff.|). In the N.T. Christ is the Bridegroom of the Kingdom (the universal spiritual church as seen by Paul, strkjv@2Corinthians:11:2; strkjv@Ephesians:5:25ff.|, and by John in strkjv@Revelation:3:20; strkjv@19:7,9; strkjv@21:2,9; strkjv@22:17|. In the Gospels Christ appears as the Bridegroom (Mark:2:19f.; strkjv@Matthew:9:15; strkjv@Luke:5:34f.; strkjv@John:3:29|). The figure of \gamos\ occurs in strkjv@Matthew:22:2-14|. Three metaphors of women appear in the Apocalypse (the Mother in chapter strkjv@Revelation:12|, the Harlot in strkjv@Revelation:17-19|, and the Bride of Christ here to the end). "The first and third present the Church under two different aspects of her life, while the second answers to her great rival and enemy" (Swete). {Is come} (\lthen\). Prophetic aorist, come at last. {Made herself ready} (\htoimasen heautn\). First aorist active indicative of \hetoimaz\ and the reflexive pronoun. See strkjv@22:2| for \htoimasmenn hs numphn\ (prepared as a bride). There is something for her to do (1John:3:3; strkjv@Jude:1:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:1|), but the chief preparation is the act of Christ (Ephesians:5:25ff.|).
rwp@Revelation:19:20 @{Was taken} (\epiasth\). First aorist (prophetic) passive indicative of the Doric \piaz\ (Attic \piez\). Cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:8|. {The false prophet} (\ho pseudoprophts\). Possibly the second beast of strkjv@13:11-17; strkjv@16:13; strkjv@20:10|. Charles takes him to be "the priesthood of the Imperial cult, which practised all kinds of magic and imposture to beguile men to worship the Beast." {That wrought the signs in his sight} (\ho poiesas ta smeia enpion autou\). As in strkjv@13:14|. {Wherewith} (\en hois\). "In which" signs. {He deceived} (\eplansen\). First aorist active indicative of \plana\. He was only able to deceive "them that had received" (\tous labontas\, articular second aorist active participle of \lamban\, "those receiving") "the mark of the beast" (13:16; strkjv@14:9ff.; strkjv@16:2; strkjv@20:4|) "and them that worshipped his image" (\tous proskunountas ti eikoni autou\) as in strkjv@13:15|. {They twain} (\hoi duo\). "The two." {Were cast} (\eblthsan\). First aorist passive Indicative of \ball\. They fall together as they fought together. "The day that sees the end of a false statecraft will see also that of a false priestcraft" (Swete). {Alive} (\zntes\). Present active participle of \za\, predicative nominative, "living." {Into the lake of fire} (\eis tn limnn tou puros\). Genitive \puros\ describes this \limnn\ (lake, cf. strkjv@Luke:5:1|) as it does \gehenna\ in strkjv@Matthew:5:22|. See also strkjv@20:10; strkjv@21:8|. It is a different figure from the "abyss" in strkjv@9:1ff; strkjv@20:1ff|. This is the final abode of Satan, the beast, the false prophet, and wicked men. {That burneth with brimstone} (\ts kaiomens en theii\). Note the genitive here in place of the accusative \limnn\, perhaps because of the intervening genitive \puros\ (neuter, not feminine). The agreement is regular in strkjv@21:8|. For \en theii\ (with brimstone) see strkjv@14:10; strkjv@20:10; strkjv@21:8|. The fact of hell is clearly taught here, but the imagery is not to be taken literally any more than that of heaven in chapters strkjv@Revelation:4; 5; 21; 22| is to be so understood. Both fall short of the reality.
rwp@Revelation:21:7 @{He that overcometh} (\ho nikn\). Recalls the promises at the close of each of the Seven Letters in chapters 2 and 3. {Shall inherit} (\klronomsei\). Future active of \klronome\, word with great history (Mark:10:17; strkjv@1Peter:1:4; strkjv@Galatians:4:7; strkjv@Romans:8:17|), here interpreted for the benefit of these who share in Christ's victory. {I will be his God} (\Esomai auti theos\). Repeated Old Testament promise (first to Abraham, strkjv@Genesis:17:7f.|). Cf. strkjv@Revelation:21:3|. {He shall be my son} (\autos estai moi huios\). Made first of Solomon (2Samuel:7:14|) and applied to David later in strkjv@Psalms:89:26f|.
rwp@Revelation:21:22 @{I saw no temple therein} (\naon ouk eidon en auti\). "Temple I did not see in it." The whole city is a temple in one sense (verse 16|), but it is something more than a temple even with its sanctuary and Shekinah Glory in the Holy of Holies. {For the Lord God the Almighty, and the Lamb are the temple thereof} (\ho gar Kurios ho theos ho pantokratr, naos auts estin kai to arnion\). "For the Lord God, the Almighty, is the sanctuary of it and the Lamb." The Eternal Presence is the Shekinah Glory of God (verse 3|). In strkjv@2Corinthians:6:16| we are the sanctuary of God here, but now God is our Sanctuary, and so is the Lamb as in chapters strkjv@Revelation:4; 5|. See strkjv@1:8| and often for the description of God here.
rwp@Revelation:22:2 @{In the midst of the street thereof} (\en mesi ts plateias auts\). Connected probably with the river in verse 1|, though many connect it with verse 2|. Only one street mentioned here as in strkjv@21:21|. {On this side of the river and on that} (\tou potamou enteuthen kai ekeithen\). \Enteuthen\ occurs as a preposition in strkjv@Daniel:12:5| (Theodoret) and may be so here (post-positive), purely adverbial in strkjv@John:19:18|. {The tree of life} (\xulon zs\). For the metaphor see strkjv@Genesis:1:11f.| and strkjv@Revelation:2:7; strkjv@22:14|. \Xulon\ is used for a green tree in strkjv@Luke:23:31; strkjv@Ezekiel:47:12|. {Bearing} (\poioun\). Neuter active participle of \poie\ (making, producing, as in strkjv@Matthew:7:17|). Some MSS. have \poin\ (masculine), though \xulon\ is neuter. {Twelve manner of fruits} (\karpous ddeka\). "Twelve fruits." {Yielding} (\apodidoun\). Neuter active participle of \apodidmi\, to give back, but some MSS. have \apodidous\ (masculine) like \poin\. {For the healing of the nations} (\eis therapeian tn ethnn\). Spiritual healing, of course, as leaves (\phulla\) are often used for obtaining medicines. Here again the problem occurs whether this picture is heaven before the judgment or afterwards. Charles distinguishes sharply between the Heavenly City for the millennial reign and the New Jerusalem that descends from heaven after the judgment. Charles rearranges these chapters to suit his theory. But chronology is precarious here.
rwp@Romans:3:1 @{What advantage then hath the Jew?} (\ti oun to perisson tou Ioudaiou?\). Literally, "What then is the overplus of the Jew?" What does the Jew have over and above the Gentile? It is a pertinent question after the stinging indictment of the Jew in chapter 2. {The profit} (\h phelia\). The help. Old word, only here in N.T. See strkjv@Mark:8:36| for \phelei\, the verb to profit.
rwp@Romans:3:31 @{Nay, we establish the law} (\alla nomon histanomen\). Present indicative active of late verb \histan\ from \histmi\. This Paul hinted at in verse 21|. How he will show in chapter 4 how Abraham himself is an example of faith and in his life illustrates the very point just made. Besides, apart from Christ and the help of the Holy Spirit no one can keep God's law. The Mosaic law is only workable by faith in Christ.
rwp@Romans:5:1 @{Being therefore justified by faith} (\dikaithentes oun ek pistes\). First aorist passive participle of \dikaio\, to set right and expressing antecedent action to the verb \echmen\. The \oun\ refers to the preceding conclusive argument (chapters 1 to 4) that this is done by faith. {Let us have peace with God} (\eirnn echmen pros ton theon\). This is the correct text beyond a doubt, the present active subjunctive, not \echomen\ (present active indicative) of the Textus Receptus which even the American Standard Bible accepts. It is curious how perverse many real scholars have been on this word and phrase here. Godet, for instance. Vincent says that "it is difficult if not impossible to explain it." One has only to observe the force of the _tense_ to see Paul's meaning clearly. The mode is the volitive subjunctive and the present tense expresses linear action and so does not mean "make peace" as the ingressive aorist subjunctive \eirnn schmen\ would mean. A good example of \schmen\ occurs in strkjv@Matthew:21:38| (\schmen tn klronomian autou\) where it means: "Let us get hold of his inheritance." Here \eirnn echmen\ can only mean: "Let us enjoy peace with God" or "Let us retain peace with God." We have in strkjv@Acts:9:31| \eichen eirnn\ (imperfect and so linear), the church "enjoyed peace," not "made peace." The preceding justification (\dikaithentes\) "made peace with God." Observe \pros\ (face to face) with \ton theon\ and \dia\ (intermediate agent) with \tou kuriou\.
rwp@Romans:6:19 @{I speak after the manner of men} (\anthrpinon leg\). "I speak a human word." He begs pardon for using "slaving" in connection with righteousness. But it is a good word, especially for our times when self-assertiveness and personal liberty bulk so large in modern speech. See strkjv@3:5; strkjv@Galatians:3:15| where he uses \kata anthrpon\. {Because of the infirmity of your flesh} (\dia tn astheneian ts sarkos humn\). Because of defective spiritual insight largely due to moral defects also. {Servants to uncleanness} (\doula ti akatharsii\). Neuter plural form of \doulos\ to agree with \mel\ (members). Patently true in sexual sins, in drunkenness, and all fleshly sins, absolutely slaves like narcotic fiends. {Songs:now} (\houts nun\). Now that you are born again in Christ. Paul uses twice again the same verb \paristmi\, to present (\parestsate, parastsate\). {Servants to righteousness} (\doula ti dikaiosuni\). Repeats the idea of verse 18|. {Unto sanctification} (\eis hagiasmon\). This the goal, the blessed consummation that demands and deserves the new slavery without occasional lapses or sprees (verse 15|). This late word appears only in LXX, N.T., and ecclesiastical writers so far. See on strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:30|. Paul includes sanctification in his conception of the God-kind (1:17|) of righteousness (both justification, strkjv@1:18-5:21| and sanctification, chapters 6-8|). It is a life process of consecration, not an instantaneous act. Paul shows that we ought to be sanctified (6:1-7:6|) and illustrates the obligation by death (6:1-14|), by slavery (6:15-23|), and by marriage (7:1-6|).
rwp@Romans:8:39 @{To separate us} (\hms chrisai\). Aorist active infinitive of \choriz\ (same verb as in 35|). God's love is victor over all possible foes, "God's love that is in Christ Jesus." Paul has reached the mountain top. He has really completed his great argument concerning the God-kind of righteousness save for its bearing on some special problems. The first of these concerns the fact that the Jews (God's chosen people) have so largely rejected the gospel (chapters 9-11|).
rwp@Romans:12:1 @{Therefore} (\oun\). This inferential participle gathers up all the great argument of chapters 1-11|. Now Paul turns to exhortation (\parakal\), "I beseech you." {By the mercies} (\dia tn oiktirmn\). "By means of the mercies of God" as shown in his argument and in our lives. See strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3| for "the Father of mercies." {To present} (\parastsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \paristmi\, for which verb see strkjv@6:13|, a technical term for offering a sacrifice (Josephus, _Ant_. IV. 6, 4), though not in the O.T. Used of presenting the child Jesus in the temple (Luke:2:22|), of the Christian presenting himself (Romans:6:13|), of God presenting the saved (Ephesians:5:27|), of Christ presenting the church (Colossians:1:28|). {Bodies} (\smata\). Songs:literally as in strkjv@6:13,19; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:10| and in contrast with \nous\ (mind) in verse 2|. {A living sacrifice} (\thusian zsan\). In contrast with the Levitical sacrifices of slain animals. Cf. strkjv@6:8,11,13|. Not a propitiatory sacrifice, but one of praise. {Acceptable} (\euareston\). "Well-pleasing." See on ¯2Corinthians:5:9|. {Which is your reasonable service} (\tn logikn humn latreian\). "Your rational (spiritual) service (worship)." For \latreia\, see on ¯9:4|. \Logikos\ is from \logos\, reason. The phrase means here "worship rendered by the reason (or soul)." Old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Peter:2:2| \to logikon gala\ (not logical milk, but the milk nourishing the soul).
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.
rwp@Romans:15:33 @{The God of peace} (\ho theos ts eirns\). One of the characteristics of God that Paul often mentions in benedictions (1Thessalonians:5:23; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:16; strkjv@2Corinthians:13:11; strkjv@Phillipians:4:9; strkjv@Romans:16:20|). Because of the "amen" here some scholars would make this the close of the Epistle and make chapter 16 a separate Epistle to the Ephesians. But the MSS. are against it. There is nothing strange at all in Paul's having so many friends in Rome though he had not yet been there himself. Rome was the centre of the world's life as Paul realized (1:15|). All men sooner or later hoped to see Rome.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}