OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp simply:
rwp@
1Corinthians:13:2 @The ecstatic gifts (verse 1|) are worthless. Equally so are the teaching gifts (prophecy, knowledge of mysteries, all knowledge). Crasis here in \kan=kai ean\. Paul is not condemning these great gifts. He simply places love above them and essential to them. Equally futile is wonder-working faith "so as to remove mountains" (\hste or methistanein\) without love. This may have been a proverb or Paul may have known the words of Jesus (Matthew:17:20; strkjv@21:21|). {I am nothing} (\outhen eimi\). Not \outheis\, nobody, but an absolute zero. This form in \th\ rather than \d\ (\ouden\) had a vogue for a while (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 219).
rwp@2Timothy:1:14 @{That good thing which was committed unto thee} (\tn kaln parathkn\). Simply, "the good deposit." {Guard} (\phulaxon\). As in strkjv@1Timothy:6:20|. God has also made an investment in Timothy (cf. verse 12|). Timothy must not let that fail. {Which dwelleth in us} (\tou enoikountos en hmin\). It is only through the Holy Spirit that Timothy or any of us can guard God's deposit with us.
rwp@2Timothy:2:5 @{If also a man contend in the games} (\ean de kai athli tis\). Condition of third class with present (linear) active subjunctive of \athle\, old and common verb (from \athlos\, a contest), only this verse in N.T., but \sunathle\ in strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|. Note sharp distinction between \athli\ (present subjunctive, engage in a contest in general) and \athlsi\ (first aorist active subjunctive, engage in a particular contest). Not "except he have contended," but simply "unless he contend" (in any given case) "lawfully" (\nomims\). Old adverb, agreeably to the law, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:1:8|. {Is not crowned} (\ou stephanoutai\). Present passive indicative of \stephano\, old verb (from \stephanos\, crown), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:2:7,9|. One apodosis for two protases. The victor in the athletic contests was crowned with a garland.
rwp@3John:1:10 @{If I come} (\ean elth\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\. He hopes to come (verse 14|), as he had said in strkjv@2John:1:12| (one argument for identifying II John with the letter in strkjv@3John:1:9|). {I will bring to remembrance} (\hupomns\). Future active indicative of \hupomimnsk\, old compound (John:14:26; strkjv@2Peter:1:12|). The aged apostle is not afraid of Diotrephes and here defies him. {Which he doeth} (\ha poiei\). Present active indicative, "which he keeps on doing." {Prating against us} (\phluarn hms\). Present active participle of old verb (from \phluaros\, babbling strkjv@1Timothy:5:13|), to accuse idly and so falsely, here only in N.T. with accusative \hms\ (us). {With wicked words} (\logois ponrois\). Instrumental case. Not simply foolish chatter, but malevolent words. {Not content} (\m arkoumenos\). Present passive participle of \arke\ with usual negative \m\. For this verb in this sense see strkjv@1Timothy:6:8; strkjv@Hebrews:13:5|, only there \epi\ is absent. John knows that the conduct of Diotrephes will not stand the light. See Paul's threats of exposure (1Corinthians:4:21; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:11; strkjv@13:1-3|). And John is the apostle of love all the same. {He himself} (\autos\). That was bad enough. {Them that would} (\tous boulomenous\). "Those willing or wishing or receive the brethren" from John. {He forbiddeth} (\kluei\). "He hinders." Present active indicative of \klu\ and means either actual success in one case (punctiliar use of the present indicative) or repetition in several instances (linear action) or conative action attempted, but not successful as in strkjv@Matthew:3:14| (this same verb) and strkjv@John:10:32|. {Casteth them out of the church} (\ek ts ekklsias ekballei\). Here again \ekballei\ can be understood in various ways, like \kluei\. This verb occurs in strkjv@John:2:15| for casting out of the temple the profaners of it and for casting the blind man out of the synagogue (John:9:34f.|). If this ancient "church-boss" did not succeed in expelling John's adherents from the church, he certainly tried to do it.
rwp@Acts:1:1 @_The Title_ is simply _Acts_ (\Praxeis\) in Aleph, Origen, Tertullian, Didymus, Hilary, Eusebius, Epiphanius. _The Acts of the Apostles_ (\Praxeis apostoln\) is the reading of B D (Aleph in subscription) Athanasius, Origen, Tertullian, Cyprian, Eusebius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Theodoret, Hilary. _The Acts of the Holy Apostles_ (\Praxeis tn hagin apostoln\) is read by A2 E G H A K Chrysostom. It is possible that the book was given no title at all by Luke, for it is plain that usage varied greatly even in the same writers. The long title as found in the Textus Receptus (Authorized Version) is undoubtedly wrong with the adjective "Holy." The reading of B D, "_The Acts of the Apostles_," may be accepted as probably correct.
rwp@Acts:2:42 @{They continued steadfastly} (\san proskarturountes\). Periphrastic active imperfect of \proskarture\ as in strkjv@Acts:1:14| (same participle in verse 46|). {Fellowship} (\koinnii\). Old word from \koinnos\ (partner, sharer in common interest) and this from \koinos\ what is common to all. This partnership involves participation in, as the blood of Christ (Phillipians:2:1|) or co-operation in the work of the gospel (Phillipians:1:5|) or contribution for those in need (2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@9:13|). Hence there is wide diversity of opinion concerning the precise meaning of \koinnia\ in this verse. It may refer to the distribution of funds in verse 44| or to the oneness of spirit in the community of believers or to the Lord's Supper (as in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:16|) in the sense of communion or to the fellowship in the common meals or \agapae\ (love-feasts). {The breaking of bread} (\ti klasei tou artou\). The word \klasis\ is an old word, but used only by Luke in the N.T. (Luke:24:35; strkjv@Acts:2:42|), though the verb \kla\ occurs in other parts of the N.T. as in verse 46|. The problem here is whether Luke refers to the ordinary meal as in strkjv@Luke:24:35| or to the Lord's Supper. The same verb \kla\ is used of breaking bread at the ordinary meal (Luke:24:30|) or the Lord's Supper (Luke:22:19|). It is generally supposed that the early disciples attached so much significance to the breaking of bread at the ordinary meals, more than our saying grace, that they followed the meal with the Lord's Supper at first, a combination called \agapai\ or love-feasts. "There can be no doubt that the Eucharist at this period was preceded uniformly by a common repast, as was the case when the ordinance was instituted" (Hackett). This led to some abuses as in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20|. Hence it is possible that what is referred to here is the Lord's Supper following the ordinary meal. "To simply explain \ti klasei tou artou\ as='The Holy Communion' is to pervert the plain meaning of words, and to mar the picture of family life, which the text places before us as the ideal of the early believers" (Page). But in strkjv@Acts:20:7| they seem to have come together especially for the observance of the Lord's Supper. Perhaps there is no way to settle the point conclusively here. {The prayers} (\tais proseuchais\). Services where they prayed as in strkjv@1:14|, in the temple (Acts:3:1|), in their homes (4:23|).
rwp@Acts:5:24 @{They were much perplexed} (\diporoun\). Imperfect active of \diapore\ old verb by Luke only in the N.T. See already on strkjv@Acts:2:12|. They continued puzzled. {Whereunto this would grow} (\ti an genoito touto\). More exactly, {As to what this would become}. Second aorist middle optative of \ginomai\ with \an\, the conclusion of a condition of the fourth class (undetermined with less likelihood of determination), the unexpressed condition being "if the thing should be allowed to go on." The indirect question simply retains the optative with \an\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1021, 1044). If they had only known how this grain of mustard seed would grow into the greatest tree on earth and how dwarfed the tree of Judaism would be beside it!
rwp@Acts:8:9 @{Simon} (\Simn\). One of the common names (Josephus, _Ant_. XX. 7, 2) and a number of messianic pretenders had this name. A large number of traditions in the second and third centuries gathered round this man and Baur actually proposed that the Simon of the Clementine Homilies is really the apostle Paul though Paul triumphed over the powers of magic repeatedly (Acts:13:6-12; strkjv@19:11-19|), "a perfect absurdity" (Spitta, _Apostelgeschichte_, p. 149). One of the legends is that this Simon Magus of Acts is the father of heresy and went to Rome and was worshipped as a god (so Justin Martyr). But a stone found in the Tiber A.D. 1574 has an inscription to _Semoni Sanco Deo Fidio Sacrum_ which is (Page) clearly to Hercules, Sancus being a Sabine name for Hercules. This Simon in Samaria is simply one of the many magicians of the time before the later gnosticism had gained a foothold. "In his person Christianity was for the first time confronted with superstition and religious imposture, of which the ancient world was at this period full" (Furneaux). {Which beforetime used sorcery} (\prouprchen mageun\). An ancient idiom (periphrastic), the present active participle \mageun\ with the imperfect active verb from \prouparch\, the idiom only here and strkjv@Luke:23:12| in the N.T. Literally "Simon was existing previously practising magic." This old verb \mageu\ is from \magos\ (a \magus\, seer, prophet, false prophet, sorcerer) and occurs here alone in the N.T. {Amazed} (existann). Present active participle of the verb \existan\, later form of \existmi\, to throw out of position, displace, upset, astonish, chiefly in the Gospels in the N.T. Same construction as \mageun\. {Some great one} (\tina megan\). Predicate accusative of general reference (infinitive in indirect discourse). It is amazing how gullible people are in the presence of a manifest impostor like Simon. The Magi were the priestly order in the Median and Persian empires and were supposed to have been founded by Zoroaster. The word \magoi\ (magi) has a good sense in strkjv@Matthew:2:1|, but here and in strkjv@Acts:13:6| it has the bad sense like our "magic."
rwp@Acts:10:17 @{Was much perplexed in himself} (\en heauti diporei\). Imperfect active of \diapore\, intensive compound (\dia\, thoroughly, and \a\ privative and \poros\, way), to be completely at a loss to know what road to take. Old verb, but in N.T. only in Luke and Acts. Page notes that Luke is singularly fond of verbs compounded with \dia\. See on ¯Luke:9:7| and strkjv@Acts:2:12|. When out of the ecstasy he was more puzzled than ever. {Might be} (\an ei\). Optative with \an\ in indirect question simply retained from the direct (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1021, 1044). See strkjv@Acts:17:18|, for the direct and strkjv@Luke:1:62| for the indirect (\an theloi\ both times). It is the conclusion of a fourth class condition. {Having made inquiry} (\diertsantes\). First aorist active participle of \dierta\, another compound of \dia\, to ask one after another, to ask through, old verb, but only here in the N.T. It took diligent inquiry to find the obscure house of Simon the tanner. {Stood before the gate} (\epestsan epi ton pulna\). Second aorist active indicative of \ephistmi\, intransitive. Note repetition of \epi\. The messengers stopped right at the folding gates of the passage (\pulna\) which led from the street to the inner court or house.
rwp@Acts:10:34 @{Opened his mouth} (\anoixas to stoma\). Solemn formula for beginning his address (8:35; strkjv@18:14; strkjv@Matthew:5:2; strkjv@13:35|). But also good elocution for the speaker. {I perceive} (\katalambanomai\). Aoristic present middle of \katalamban\, to take hold of, the middle noting mental action, to lay hold with the mind (Acts:4:13; strkjv@10:34; strkjv@25:25; strkjv@Ephesians:3:18|). It had been a difficult thing for Peter to grasp, but now "of a truth" (\ep' altheias\) the light has cleared away the fogs. It was not until Peter had crossed the threshold of the house of Cornelius in the new environment and standpoint that he sees this new and great truth. {Respecter of persons} (\prospolmpts\). This compound occurs only here and in Chrysostom. It is composed of \prospon\ face or person (\pros\ and \ops\, before the eye or face) and \lamban\. The abstract form \prospolmpsia\ occurs in strkjv@James:2:1| (also strkjv@Romans:2:11; strkjv@Ephesians:6:9; strkjv@Colossians:3:25|) and the verb \prospolempte\ in strkjv@James:2:9|. The separate phrase (\lambanein prospon\) occurs in strkjv@Luke:20:21; strkjv@Galatians:2:6|. The phrase was already in the LXX (Deuteronomy:10:17; strkjv@2Chronicles:19:7; strkjv@Psalms:82:6|). Luke has simply combined the two words into one compound one. The idea is to pay regard to one's looks or circumstances rather than to his intrinsic character. The Jews had come to feel that they were the favourites of God and actually sons of the kingdom of heaven because they were descendants of Abraham. John the Baptist rebuked them for this fallacy.
rwp@Acts:11:1 @{In Judea} (\kata tn Ioudaian\). Throughout Judea (probably all Palestine), distributive use of \kata\. The news from Casearea spread like wildfire among the Jewish Christians. The case of the Samaritans was different, for they were half Jews, though disliked. But here were real Romans even if with Jewish affinities. {Had received} (\edexanto\). First aorist middle indicative. The English idiom requires "had" received, the Greek has simply "received."
rwp@Acts:11:15 @{As I began to speak} (\en ti arxasthai me lalein\). \En\ with the locative of the articular aorist infinitive \arxasthai\ (punctiliar action simply) and the accusative of general reference. The second infinitive \lalein\ (to speak) is dependent on \arxasthai\, "In the beginning to speak as to me." {Even as on us at the beginning} (\hsper kai eph' hms en archi\). Peter recalls vividly the events at Pentecost, the speaking with tongues and all. It is noteworthy that Peter does not here repeat his sermon. "He rests his defence, not on what he said, but on what God did" (Furneaux).
rwp@Acts:11:25 @{To seek for Saul} (\anaztsai Saulon\). First aorist (effective) active infinitive of purpose. \Anazte\ is a common verb since Plato, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:2:44,45|, to seek up and down (\ana\), back and forth, to hunt up, to make a thorough search till success comes. It is plain from strkjv@Galatians:1:21| that Saul had not been idle in Cilicia. Tarsus was not very far from Antioch. Barnabas probably knew that Saul was a vessel of choice (Acts:9:15|) by Christ for the work among the Gentiles. He knew, of course, of Saul's work with the Hellenists in Jerusalem (9:29|) and echoes of his work in Cilicia and Syria had probably come to him. Songs:to Tarsus he goes when he saw the need for help. "He had none of the littleness which cannot bear the presence of a possible rival" (Furneaux). Barnabas knew his own limitations and knew where the man of destiny for this crisis was, the man who already had the seal of God upon him. The hour and the man met when Barnabas brought Saul to Antioch. The door was open and the man was ready, far more ready than when Jesus called him on the road to Damascus. The years in Cilicia and Syria were not wasted for they had not been idle. If we only knew the facts, it is probable that Saul also had been preaching to Hellenes as well as to Hellenists. Jesus had definitely called him to work among the Gentiles (9:15|). In his own way he had come to the same place that Peter reached in Caesarea and that Barnabas now holds in Antioch. God always has a man prepared for a great emergency in the kingdom. The call of Barnabas was simply the repetition of the call of Christ. Songs:Saul came.
rwp@Acts:11:26 @{Even for a whole year} (\kai eniauton holon\). Accusative of extent of time, probably the year A.D. 44, the year preceding the visit to Jerusalem (11:30|), the year of the famine. The preceding years with Tarsus as headquarters covered A.D. 37 (39) to 44. {They were gathered together with the church} (\sunachthnai en ti ekklsii\). First aorist passive infinitive of \sunag\, old verb, probably here to meet together as in strkjv@Matthew:28:12|. In strkjv@Acts:14:27| the verb is used of gathering together the church, but here \en ti ekklsii\ excludes that idea. Barnabas met together "in the church" (note first use of the word for the disciples at Antioch). This peculiar phrase accents the leadership and co-operation of Barnabas and Saul in teaching (\didaxai\, first aorist active infinitive) much people. Both infinitives are in the nominative case, the subject of \egeneto\ (it came to pass). {And that the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch} (\chrmatisai te prts en Antiocheii tous mathtas Christianous\). This first active infinitive \chrmatisai\ is also a subject of \egeneto\ and is added as a separate item by the use of \te\ rather than \kai\. For the word itself in the sense of divine command see on ¯Matthew:2:12,22; strkjv@Luke:2:26; strkjv@Acts:10:22|. Here and in strkjv@Romans:7:3| it means to be called or named (assuming a name from one's business, \chrma\, from \chraomai\, to use or to do business). Polybius uses it in this sense as here. \Tous mathtas\ (the disciples) is in the accusative of general reference with the infinitive. \Christianous\ (Christians) is simply predicate accusative. This word is made after the pattern of \Herodianus\ (Matthew:22:16|, \Heridianoi\, followers of Herod), \Caesarianus\, a follower of Caesar (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 377, gives papyri examples of the genitive \Kaisaros\ meaning also "belonging to Caesar" like the common adjective \Caesarianus\). It is made thus like a Latin adjective, though it is a Greek word, and it refers to the Hebrew belief in a Messiah (Page). The name was evidently given to the followers of Christ by the Gentiles to distinguish them from the Jews since they were Greeks, not Grecian Jews. The Jews would not call them Christians because of their own use of \Christos\ the Messiah. The Jews termed them Galileans or Nazarenes. The followers of Christ called themselves disciples (learners), believers, brethren, saints, those of the Way. The three uses of Christian in the N.T. are from the heathen standpoint (here), strkjv@Acts:26:28| (a term of contempt in the mouth of Agrippa), and strkjv@1Peter:4:16| (persecution from the Roman government). It is a clear distinction from both Jews and Gentiles and it is not strange that it came into use first here in Antioch when the large Greek church gave occasion for it. Later Ignatius was bishop in Antioch and was given to the lions in Rome, and John Chrysostom preached here his wonderful sermons.
rwp@Acts:12:23 @{Smote him} (\epataxen auton\). Effective aorist active indicative of \patass\, old verb, used already in verse 7| of gentle smiting of the angel of the Lord, here of a severe stroke of affliction. Like Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel:4:30|) pride went before a fall. He was struck down in the very zenith of his glory. {Because} (\anth' hn\). \Anti\ with the genitive of the relative pronoun, "in return for which things." He accepted the impious flattery (Hackett) instead of giving God the glory. He was a nominal Jew. {He was eaten of worms} (\genomenos sklkobrtos\). Ingressive aorist middle participle, "becoming worm-eaten." The compound verbal adjective (\sklx\, worm, \brtos\, eaten, from \bibrsk\) is a late word (II Macc. strkjv@9:9) of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, used also of a tree (Theophrastus), here only in the N.T. The word \sklx\ was used of intestinal worms and Herodotus (IV. 205) describes Pheretima, Queen of Cyrene, as having swarms of worms which ate her flesh while still alive. Josephus (_Ant_. XIX. 8, 2) says that Herod Agrippa lingered for five days and says that the rotting of his flesh produced worms, an item in harmony with the narrative in Luke. Josephus gives further details, one a superstitious sight of an owl sitting on one of the ropes of the awning of the theatre while the people flattered him, an omen of his death to him. Luke puts it simply that God smote him. {Gave up the ghost} (\exepsuxen\). Effective aorist active of \ekpsuch\, to breathe out, late verb, medical term in Hippocrates, in the N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:5:5,10; strkjv@12:23|. Herod was carried out of the theatre a dying man and lingered only five days.
rwp@Acts:14:4 @{But the multitude of the city was divided} (\eschisth de to plthos ts poles\). First aorist passive indicative of \schiz\, old verb to split, to make a schism or factions as Sadducees and Pharisees (23:7|). This division was within the Gentile populace. Part held (\hoi men san\), literally "some were with the Jews" (\sun tois Ioudaiois\), part with the apostles (\hoi de sun tois apostolois\). Common demonstrative of contrast (\hoi men, hoi de\, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 694). The Jewish leaders made some impression on the Gentiles as at Antioch in Pisidia and later at Thessalonica (17:4f.|). This is the first time in the Acts that Paul and Barnabas are termed "apostles" (see also verse 14|). Elsewhere in the Acts the word is restricted to the twelve. Certainly Luke does not here employ it in that technical sense. To have followed Jesus in his ministry and to have seen the Risen Christ was essential to the technical use (1:22f.|). Whether Barnabas had seen the Risen Christ we do not know, but certainly Paul had (1Corinthians:9:1f.; strkjv@15:8|). Paul claimed to be an apostle on a par with the twelve (Galatians:1:1,16-18|). The word originally means simply one sent (John:13:16|) like messengers of the churches with the collection (2Corinthians:8:23|). The Jews used it of those sent from Jerusalem to collect the temple tribute. Paul applies the word to James the Lord's brother (Galatians:1:19|), to Epaphroditus (Phillipians:2:25|) as the messenger of the church in Philippi, to Silvanus and Timothy (1Thessalonians:2:6; strkjv@Acts:18:5|), apparently to Apollos (1Corinthians:4:9|), and to Andronicus and Junias (Romans:16:6f.|). He even calls the Judaizers "false apostles" (2Corinthians:11:13|).
rwp@Acts:17:19 @{And they took hold of him} (\epilabomenoi de autou\). Second aorist middle participle of \epilamban\, old verb, but in the N.T. only in the middle, here with the genitive \autou\ to lay hold of, but with no necessary sense of violence (Acts:9:27; strkjv@23:27; strkjv@Mark:8:23|), unless the idea is that Paul was to be tried before the Court of Areopagus for the crime of bringing in strange gods. But the day for that had passed in Athens. Even so it is not clear whether "{unto the Areopagus} (\epi ton Areion Pagon\") means the Hill of Mars (west of the Acropolis, north of the agora and reached by a flight of steps in the rock) or the court itself which met elsewhere as well as on the hills, usually in fact in the Stoa Basilica opening on the agora and near to the place where the dispute had gone on. Raphael's cartoon with Paul standing on Mars Hill has made us all familiar with the common view, but it is quite uncertain if it is true. There was not room on the summit for a large gathering. If Paul was brought before the Court of Areopagus (commonly called the Areopagus as here), it was not for trial as a criminal, but simply for examination concerning his new teaching in this university city whether it was strictly legal or not. Paul was really engaged in proselytism to turn the Athenians away from their old gods to Jesus Christ. But "the court of refined and polished Athenians was very different from the rough provincial magistrates of Philippi, and the philosophers who presented Paul to their cognizance very different from the mob of Thessalonians" (Rackham). It was all very polite. {May we know?} (\Dunametha gnnai\). Can we come to know (ingressive second aorist active infinitive). {This new teaching} (\h kain haut didach\). On the position of \haut\ see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 700f. The question was prompted by courtesy, sarcasm, or irony. Evidently no definite charge was laid against Paul.
rwp@Galatians:4:24 @{Which things contain an allegory} (\hatina estin allgoroumena\). Literally, "Which things are allegorized" (periphrastic present passive indicative of \allgore\). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used \ainittomai\ to speak in riddles. It is compounded of \allo\, another, and \agoreu\, to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses \tupiks\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11| of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_, the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|, the Good Shepherd in strkjv@John:10|. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo's allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it. {For these are} (\hautai gar eisin\). Allegorically interpreted, he means. {From Mount Sinai} (\apo orous Sin\). Spoken from Mount Sinai. {Bearing} (\gennsa\). Present active participle of \genna\, to beget of the male (Matthew:1:1-16|), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke:1:13,57|). {Which is Hagar} (\htis estin Hagar\). Allegorically interpreted.
rwp@Galatians:5:17 @{Lusteth against} (\epithumei kata\). Like a tug of war. This use of \sarx\ as opposed to the Spirit (Holy Spirit) personifies \sarx\. Lightfoot argues that \epithumei\ cannot be used with the Spirit and so some other verb must be supplied for it. But that is wholly needless, for the verb, like \epithumia\, does not mean evil desire, but simply to long for. Christ and Satan long for the possession of the city of Man Soul as Bunyan shows. {Are contrary the one to the other} (\alllois antikeitai\). Are lined up in conflict, face to face (\anti-\), a spiritual duel (cf. Christ's temptations), with dative case of personal interest (\alllois\). {That ye may not do} (\hina m poite\). "That ye may not keep on doing" (present active subjunctive of \poie\). {That ye would} (\ha ean thelte\). "Whatever ye wish" (indefinite relative with \ean\ and present subjunctive).
rwp@Hebrews:7:3 @{Without father, without mother, without genealogy} (\apatr, amtr, agenealogtos\). Alliteration like strkjv@Romans:1:30|, the first two old words, the third coined by the author (found nowhere else) and meaning simply "devoid of any genealogy." The argument is that from silence, made much of by Philo, but not to be pressed. The record in Genesis tells nothing of any genealogy. Melchizedek stands alone. He is not to be understood as a miraculous being without birth or death. Melchizedek has been made more mysterious than he is by reading into this interpretation what is not there. {Made like} (\aphmoimenos\). Perfect passive participle of \aphomoio\, old verb, to produce a facsimile or copy, only here in N.T. The likeness is in the picture drawn in Genesis, not in the man himself. Such artificial interpretation does not amount to proof, but only serves as a parallel or illustration. {Unto the Son of God} (\ti huii tou theou\). Associative instrumental case of \huios\. {Abideth a priest} (\menei hiereus\). According to the record in Genesis, the only one in his line just as Jesus stands alone, but with the difference that Jesus continues priest in fact in heaven. {Continually} (\eis to dinekes\). Old phrase (for the continuity) like \eis ton aina\, in N.T. only in Hebrews (7:3; strkjv@10:1,14,21|).
rwp@Hebrews:9:10 @{Only with meats and drinks and divers washings} (\monon epi brmasin kai pomasin kai diaphorois baptismois\). The parenthesis of the Revised Version here is unnecessary. The use of \epi\ here with the locative case is regular, "in the matter of" (Luke:12:52; strkjv@John:12:16; strkjv@Acts:21:24|). What ritual value these Levitical sacrifices had was confined to minute regulations about diet and ceremonial cleansing (clean and unclean). For "divers" (\diaphorois\, late adjective, in N.T. only in strkjv@Hebrews:1:4; strkjv@8:6; strkjv@9:10; strkjv@Romans:12:6|) say "different" or "various." \Baptismois\ is, of course, the Jewish ceremonial immersions (cf. strkjv@Mark:7:4; strkjv@Exodus:29:4; strkjv@Leviticus:11:25,28f.; strkjv@Numbers:8:7; strkjv@Revelation:6:2|). {Carnal ordinances} (\dikaimasin sarkos\). But the correct text is undoubtedly simply \dikaimata sarkos\ (nominative case), in apposition with \dra te kai thusiai\ (gifts and sacrifices). See strkjv@9:1| for \dikaimata\. {Imposed} (\epikeimena\). Present middle or passive participle of \epikeimai\, old verb to lie upon (be laid upon). Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:9:16|. {Until a time of reformation} (\mechri kairou diorthses\). Definite statement of the temporary nature of the Levitical system already stated in strkjv@7:10-17; strkjv@8:13| and argued clearly by Paul in strkjv@Galatians:3:15-22|. \Diorthsis\ is a late word, here alone in N.T. (from \diortho\, to set right or straight), used by Hippocrates for making straight misshapen limbs like \anortho\ in strkjv@Hebrews:12:12|. Here for reformation like \diorthma\ (reform) in strkjv@Acts:24:2f|. Christianity itself is the great Reformation of the current Judaism (Pharisaism) and the spiritual Judaism foreshadowed by the old Abrahamic promise (see strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9|).
rwp@Hebrews:11:40 @{God having provided} (\tou theou problepsamenou\). Genitive absolute with first aorist middle participle of \problep\, late compound to foresee, here only in the N.T. {Some better thing} (\kreitton ti\). "Something better," "the better promises" of strkjv@8:6|. {That apart from us they should not be made perfect} (\hina m chris hmn teleithsin\). Negative purpose clause with \hina m\ and the first aorist passive subjunctive of \teleio\. But this glorious and gracious purpose (foresight) of God is not due to any special merit in us. It is simply the fulness of the time in God's dispensation of grace of which we are the beneficiaries. But all the same and all the more (_noblesse oblige_), we should prove worthy of our heritage and of God's goodness to us and be loyal to Christ.
rwp@James:1:5 @{Lacketh wisdom} (\leipetai sophias\). Condition of first class, assumed as true, \ei\ and present passive indicative of \leip\ to be destitute of, with ablative case \sophias\. "If any one falls short of wisdom." A banking figure, to have a shortage of wisdom (not just knowledge, \gnses\, but wisdom \sophias\, the practical use of knowledge). {Let him ask} (\aiteit\). Present active imperative of \aite\, "let him keep on asking." {Of God} (\para tou theou\). "From (from beside) God," ablative case with \para\. Liberally (\hapls\). This old adverb occurs here only in the N.T. (from \haplous\, single-fold, strkjv@Matthew:6:22|, and \haplots\, simplicity, generosity, is common-- strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Romans:12:8|). But the adverb is common in the papyri by way of emphasis as simply or at all (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). Mayor argues for the sense of "unconditionally" (the logical moral sense) while Hort and Ropes agree and suggest "graciously." The other sense of "abundantly" or "liberally" suits the idea in \haplots\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Romans:12:8|, but no example of the adverb in this sense has been found unless this is one here. See strkjv@Isaiah:55:1| for the idea of God's gracious giving and the case of Solomon (1Kings:3:9-12; strkjv@Proverbs:2:3|). {Upbraideth not} (\m oneidizontos\). Present active participle of \oneidiz\ (old verb to reproach, to cast in one's teeth, strkjv@Matthew:5:11|) in the ablative case like \didontos\ agreeing with \theou\ and with the usual negative of the participle (\me\). This is the negative statement of \didontos hapls\ (giving graciously). The evil habit of giving stinging words along with the money is illustrated in Sirach strkjv@41:22 and Plutarch (_Deuteronomy:adulat._, p. 64A). ] Cf. strkjv@Hebrews:4:16|. {And it shall be given him} (\kai dothsetai auti\). First future passive of \didmi\, a blessed promise in accord with the words of Jesus (Matthew:7:7,11; strkjv@Luke:11:13|), meaning here not only "wisdom," but all good gifts, including the Holy Spirit. There are frequent reminiscences of the words of Jesus in this Epistle.
rwp@John:4:54 @{The second sign that} (\deuteron smeion\). No article, simply predicate accusative, "This again a second sign did Jesus having come out of Judea into Galilee." The first one was also in Cana (2:1ff.|), but many were wrought in Jerusalem also (2:23|).
rwp@John:5:13 @{He that was healed} (\ho iatheis\). First aorist passive articular participle of \iaomai\ (John's usual word). {Who it was} (\tis estin\). Present tense preserved in indirect question. {Had conveyed himself away} (\exeneusen\). First aorist active indicative of \ekne\, old verb to swim out, to slip out, or from \ekneu\, to turn out, to turn the head to one side (to one side with which compare \eneneuon\, they nodded, strkjv@Luke:1:62|). Either of these verbs can explain the form here. The aorist tense simply states an antecedent action without being a pastperfect. {A multitude being in the place} (\ochlou ontos en ti topi\). Genitive absolute and the reason for Christ's departure.
rwp@John:5:34 @{But the witness which I receive} (\Eg de ou tn marturian lamban\). "But I do not receive the witness" simply from a man (like John). The \eg\ (I) in sharp contrast with \humeis\ (ye) of verse 33|. Jesus complained of Nicodemus for not accepting his witness (3:11|). Cf. also strkjv@3:32|. In strkjv@1John:5:9| the witness of God is greater than that of men and this Jesus has. {That ye may be saved} (\hina humeis sthte\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive of \sz\. This was the purpose of Christ's coming, that the world might be saved (3:17|).
rwp@John:6:30 @{For a sign} (\smeion\). Predicate accusative, as a sign, with \ti\ (what). As if the sign of the day before was without value. Jesus had said that they did not understand his signs (verse 26|). {That we may see, and believe thee} (\hina idmen kai pisteusmen\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \hora\ and the first aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \pisteu\, "that we may come to see and come to have faith in thee." It is hard to have patience with this superficial and almost sneering mob. {What workest thou?} (\Ti ergazi;\). They not simply depreciate the miracle of the day before, but set up a standard for Jesus.
rwp@John:6:56 @{Abideth in me and I in him} (\en emoi menei kag en auti\). Added to the phrase in 54| in the place of \echei zn ainion\ (has eternal life). The verb \men\ (to abide) expresses continual mystical fellowship between Christ and the believer as in strkjv@15:4-7; strkjv@1John:2:6,27,28; strkjv@3:6,24; strkjv@4:12,16|. There is, of course, no reference to the Lord's Supper (Eucharist), but simply to mystical fellowship with Christ.
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:7:8 @{Go ye up to the feast} (\humeis anabte eis tn heortn\). The emphatic word by position is \humeis\ (ye) in contrast with \eg\ (I). Second aorist active imperative of \anabain\, old and common verb for going up to the feast (2:13|) or anywhere. Take your own advice (7:3|). {I go not up yet} (\eg oup anabain\). Songs:Westcott and Hort after B W L (Neutral) while \ou\ (not) is read by Aleph D, African Latin, Vulgate, Coptic (Western). Some of the early Greek Fathers were puzzled over the reading \ouk\ (I go not up) as contradictory to verse 10| wherein it is stated that Jesus did go up. Almost certainly \ouk\ (not) is correct and is not really contradictory when one notes in verse 10| that the manner of Christ's going up is precisely the opposite of the advice of the brothers in verses 3,4|. "Not yet" (\oup\) is genuine before "fulfilled" (\peplrtai\, perfect passive indicative of \plro\). One may think, if he will, that Jesus changed his plans after these words, but that is unnecessary. He simply refused to fall in with his brothers' sneering proposal for a grand Messianic procession with the caravan on the way to the feast. He will do that on the journey to the last passover.
rwp@John:7:17 @{If any man willeth to do} (\ean tis theli poiein\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and present active subjunctive \theli\ not used as a mere auxiliary verb for the future "will do," but with full force of \thel\, to will, to wish. See the same use of \thel\ in strkjv@5:40| "and yet ye are not willing to come" (\kai ou thelete elthein\). {He shall know} (\gnsetai\). Future middle indicative of \ginsk\. Experimental knowledge from willingness to do God's will. See this same point by Jesus in strkjv@5:46; strkjv@18:37|. There must be moral harmony between man's purpose and God's will. "If there be no sympathy there can be no understanding" (Westcott). Atheists of all types have no point of contact for approach to the knowledge of Christ. This fact does not prove the non-existence of God, but simply their own isolation. They are out of tune with the Infinite. For those who love God it is also true that obedience to God's will brings richer knowledge of God. Agnostic and atheistic critics are disqualified by Jesus as witnesses to his claims. {Of God} (\ek tou theou\). Out of God as source. {From myself} (\ap' emautou\). Instead of from God.
rwp@John:7:52 @{Art thou also of Galilee?} (\M kai su ek ts Galilaias ei;\). Formally negative answer expected by \m\, but really they mean to imply that Nicodemus from local feeling or prejudice has lined himself up with this Galilean mob (\ochlos\) of sympathizers with Jesus and is like Jesus himself a Galilean. "These aristocrats of Jerusalem had a scornful contempt for the rural Galileans" (Bernard). {That out of Galilee ariseth no prophet} (\hoti ek ts Galilaias prophts ouk egeiretai\). As a matter of fact Jonah, Hosea, Nahum, possibly also Elijah, Elisha, and Amos were from Galilee. It was simply the rage of the Sanhedrin against Jesus regardless of the facts. Westcott suggests that they may have reference to the future, but that is a mere excuse for them.
rwp@John:8:28 @{When ye have lifted up the Son of man} (\hotan hupsste ton huion tou anthrpou\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ (\hote + an\) and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hupso\, to lift up (_Koin_ verb from \hupsos\, height), used several times in John of the Cross of Christ (3:14; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@12:32,34|). It is unnecessary to render the aorist subjunctive as if a future perfect, simply "whenever ye lift up" (actually lift up, ingressive aorist). In strkjv@Acts:2:33| the verb is used of the Ascension. {Shall ye know} (\gnsesthe\). Future (ingressive aoristic) middle of \ginsk\. _Cognoscetis ex re quod nunc ex verbo non creditis_ (Bengel). But the knowledge from the facts like the fall of Jerusalem will come too late and will not bring a change of heart. The Holy Spirit will convict them concerning judgment (16:8|). For {I am} (\eg eimi\) see on verse ¯24|. {As the Father taught me} (\Kaths edidasken me ho patr\). This claim Jesus repeats (see verse 26|) and clearly makes on his arrival at the feast (7:16f.|). This fact marks Jesus off from the rabbis.
rwp@John:12:4 @{Judas Iscariot} (\Ioudas ho Iskarits\). See \ho Iskarits\ in strkjv@14:22|. See strkjv@6:71; strkjv@13:1| for like description of Judas save that in strkjv@6:71| the father's name is given in the genitive, \Simnos\ and \Iskaritou\ (agreeing with the father), but in strkjv@13:1| \Iskarits\ agrees with \Ioudas\, not with \Simnos\. Clearly then both father and son were called "Iscariot" or man of Kerioth in the tribe of Judah (Joshua:15:25|). Judas is the only one of the twelve not a Galilean. {One of his disciples} (\heis tn mathtn autou\). Likewise in strkjv@6:71|, only there \ek\ is used after \heis\ as some MSS. have here. This is the shameful fact that clung to the name of Judas. {Which should betray him} (\ho melln auton paradidonai\). John does not say in strkjv@6:71| (\emellen paradidonai auton\) or here that Judas "was predestined to betray Jesus" as Bernard suggests. He had his own responsibility for his guilt as Jesus said (Matthew:26:24|). \Mell\ here simply points to the act as future, not as necessary. Note the contrast between Mary and Judas. "Mary in her devotion unconsciously provides for the honour of the dead. Judas in his selfishness unconsciously brings about the death itself" (Westcott).
rwp@John:12:5 @{Sold} (\eprath\). First aorist passive indicative of \piprask\, old verb to sell (Matthew:13:46|). {For three hundred pence} (\triakosin dnarin\). Genitive of price. Same item in strkjv@Mark:14:5|, while in strkjv@Matthew:26:9| it is simply "for much" (\pollou\). But all three have "given to the poor" (\edoth ptchois\). First aorist passive indicative of \didmi\ with dative case \ptchois\ (note absence of the article, poor people), real beggars, mendicants (Matthew:19:21; strkjv@Luke:14:13|). But only John singles out Judas as the one who made the protest against this waste of money while Mark says that "some" had indignation and Matthew has it that "the disciples" had indignation. Clearly Judas was the spokesman for the group who chimed in and agreed with his protest. The amount here spent by Mary (ten guineas) would equal a day labourer's wages for a year (Dods).
rwp@John:12:16 @{Understood not} (\ouk egnsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\. Another comment by John concerning the failure of the disciples to know what was happening (cf. strkjv@2:22; strkjv@7:39|). {At the first} (\to prton\). Adverbial accusative, as in strkjv@10:40; strkjv@19:39|. {Was glorified} (\edoxasth\). First aorist passive indicative of \doxaz\, to glorify, used of his death already in strkjv@7:39| and by Jesus himself of his death, resurrection, and ascension in strkjv@12:23; strkjv@13:31|. {Then remembered they} (\tote emnsthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \mimnsk\. It was easier to understand then and they had the Holy Spirit to help them (16:13-15|). {Were written of him} (\n ep' auti gegrammena\). Periphrastic past perfect passive of \graph\ with neuter plural participle agreeing with \tauta\ (these things) and singular verb, though the plural \san\ could have been used. Note the threefold repetition of \tauta\ in this verse, "clumsy" Bernard calls it, but making for clarity. The use of \ep' auti\ for "of him" rather than \peri autou\ is unusual, but occurs in strkjv@Revelation:10:11; strkjv@22:16|. {They had done} (\epoisan\). First aorist active indicative of \poie\, simply, "they did."
rwp@John:13:8 @{Thou shalt never wash my feet} (\ou m nipsis mou tous podas eis ton aina\). Strong double negative \ou m\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \nipt\ with \eis ton aina\ (for ever) added and \mou\ (my) made emphatic by position. Peter's sudden humility should settle the issue, he felt. {If I wash thee not} (\ean m nips se\). Third-class condition with \ean m\ (negative). Jesus picks up the challenge of Peter whose act amounted to irreverence and want of confidence. "The first condition of discipleship is self-surrender" (Westcott). Songs:"Jesus, waiting with the basin" (Dods), concludes. {Thou hast no part with me} (\ouk echeis meros met' emou\). Not simply here at the supper with its fellowship, but in the deeper sense of mystic fellowship as Peter was quick to see. Jesus does not make foot-washing essential to spiritual fellowship, but simply tests Peter's real pride and mock-humility by this symbol of fellowship.
rwp@John:16:4 @{Have I spoken} (\lelalka\). Perfect active indicative as in strkjv@15:11; strkjv@16:1|. Solemn repetition. {When their hour is come} (\hotan elthi h hra autn\). Indefinite temporal clause, \hotan\ with the second aorist active subjunctive of \erchomai\, "whenever their hour comes." The time appointed for these things. {Now that} (\hoti\). Simply "that" (declarative conjunction in indirect discourse. Forewarned is to be forearmed. Cf. strkjv@13:19|. {From the beginning} (\ex archs\). As in strkjv@6:64| but practically like \ap' archs\ in strkjv@15:27|. While Christ was with them, he was the object of attack (15:18|).
rwp@John:18:6 @{Fell to the ground} (\epesan chamai\). Second aorist active indicative of \pipt\ with first aorist ending (\-an\). This recoil made them stumble. But why did they step back? Was it the former claim of Jesus ({I am}, \eg eimi\) to be on an equality with God (8:58; strkjv@13:19|) or mere embarrassment and confusion or supernatural power exerted by Jesus? B adds \Isous\ which must mean simply: "I am Jesus."
rwp@John:18:40 @{Cried out} (\ekraugasan\). First aorist active of \kraugaz\, old and rare verb from \kraug\, outcry (Matthew:25:6|), as in strkjv@Matthew:12:19|. {Not this man} (\m touton\). Contemptuous use of \houtos\. The priests put the crowd up to this choice (Mark:15:11|) and Pilate offered the alternative (Matthew:27:17|, one MS. actually gives Jesus as the name of Barabbas also). The name \Barabbas\ in Aramaic simply means son of a father. {A robber} (\lists\). Old word from \lizomai\, to plunder, and so a brigand and possibly the leader of the band to which the two robbers belonged who were crucified with Jesus. Luke terms him an insurgent and murderer (Luke:23:19,25|). They chose Barabbas in preference to Jesus and apparently Jesus died on the very cross planned for Barabbas.
rwp@John:19:1 @{Took and scourged} (\elaben kai emastigsen\). First aorist active indicative of \lamban\ and \mastigo\ (from \mastix\, whip). For this redundant use of \lamban\ see also verse 6|. It is the causative use of \mastigo\, for Pilate did not actually scourge Jesus. He simply ordered it done, perhaps to see if the mob would be satisfied with this penalty on the alleged pretender to royalty (Luke:23:22|) whom Pilate had pronounced innocent (John:18:38|), an illegal act therefore. It was a preliminary to crucifixion, but Jesus was not yet condemned. The Sanhedrin had previously mocked Jesus (Mark:14:65; strkjv@Matthew:26:67f.; strkjv@Luke:22:63ff.|) as the soldiers will do later (Mark:15:16-19; strkjv@Matthew:27:27-30|). This later mock coronation (Mark and Matthew) was after the condemnation. {Plaited a crown of thorns} (\plexantes stephanon ex akanthn\). Old verb \plek\, to weave, in the N.T. only here, strkjv@Mark:15:17; strkjv@Matthew:27:19|. Not impossible for the mock coronation to be repeated. {Arrayed him} (\periebalon auton\). "Placed around him" (second aorist active indicative of \periball\). {In a purple garment} (\himation porphuroun\). Old adjective \porphureos\ from \porphura\, purple cloth (Mark:15:17,20|), dyed in purple, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:18:16|. Jesus had been stripped of his outer garment \himation\ (Matthew:27:28|) and the scarlet cloak of one of the soldiers may have been put on him (Matthew:27:28|).
rwp@John:19:12 @{Sought} (\eztei\). Imperfect active, "kept on seeking," "made renewed efforts to release him." He was afraid to act boldly against the will of the Jews. {If thou release this man} (\ean touton apolusis\). Condition of third class, a direct threat to Pilate. He knew all the time that the Sanhedrin might tell Caesar on him. {Thou art not Caesar's friend} (\ouk ei philos tou kaisaros\). Later to Vespasian this was an official title, here simply a daring threat to Pilate. {Speaketh against Caesar} (\antilegei ti kaisari\). Caesar brooks no rival. Jesus had allowed himself to be acclaimed king of Israel in the Triumphal Entry (John:12:13; strkjv@Mark:11:10; strkjv@Luke:19:38|). The Sanhedrin have caught Pilate in their toils.
rwp@John:19:17 @{Bearing the cross for himself} (\bastazn hauti ton stauron\). Cf. strkjv@Luke:14:27| for this very picture in the words of Jesus. The dative case of the reflexive pronoun \hauti\ "for himself" is in strict accord with Roman custom. "A criminal condemned to be crucified was required to carry his own cross" (Bernard). But apparently Jesus under the strain of the night before and the anguish of heart within him gave out so that Simon of Cyrene was impressed to carry it for Jesus (Mark:15:21f.; strkjv@Matthew:27:32f.; strkjv@Luke:23:26|). See strkjv@Mark:15:22f.; strkjv@Matthew:27:33f.; strkjv@Luke:23:33| for the meaning of "place of a skull" or Calvary and Golgotha in Hebrew (Aramaic). Luke has simply \Kranion\ (Skull), a skull-looking place.
rwp@John:19:19 @{Pilate wrote a title also} (\egrapsen kai titlon ho Peilatos\). Only John tells us that Pilate himself wrote it and John alone uses the technical Latin word _titlon_ (several times in inscriptions), for the board with the name of the criminal and the crime in which he is condemned; Mark (Mark:15:26|) and Luke (Luke:23:28|) use \epigraph\ (superscription). Matthew (Matthew:27:37|) has simply \aitian\ (accusation). The inscription in John is the fullest of the four and has all in any of them save the words "this is" (\houtos estin\) in strkjv@Matthew:27:37|.
rwp@Jude:1:7 @{Even as} (\hs\). Just "as." The third instance (Jude:passes by the deluge) in Jude, the cities of the plain. {The cities about them} (\hai peri autas poleis\). These were also included, Admah and Zeboiim (Deuteronomy:29:23; strkjv@Hosea:11:8|). Zoar, the other city, was spared. {In like manner} (\ton homoion tropon\). Adverbial accusative (cf. \hs\). Like the fallen angels. {Having given themselves over to fornication} (\ekporneusasai\). First aorist active participle feminine plural of \ekporneu\, late and rare compound (perfective use of \ek\, outside the moral law), only here in N.T., but in LXX (Genesis:38:24; strkjv@Exodus:34:15f.|, etc.). Cf. \aselgeian\ in verse 4|. {Strange flesh} (\sarkos heteras\). Horrible licentiousness, not simply with women not their wives or in other nations, but even unnatural uses (Romans:1:27|) for which the very word "sodomy" is used (Genesis:19:4-11|). The pronoun \heteras\ (other, strange) is not in strkjv@2Peter:2:10|. {Are set forth} (\prokeintai\). Present middle indicative of \prokeimai\, old verb, to lie before, as in strkjv@Hebrews:12:1f|. {As an example} (\deigma\). Predicate nominative of \deigma\, old word (from \deiknumi\ to show), here only in N.T., sample, specimen. strkjv@2Peter:2:6| has \hupodeigma\ (pattern). {Suffering} (\hupechousai\). Present active participle of \hupech\, old compound, to hold under, often with \dikn\ (right, justice, sentence strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:9|) to suffer sentence (punishment), here only in N.T. {Of eternal fire} (\puros ainiou\). Like \desmois aidiois\ in verse 7|. Cf. the hell of fire (Matthew:5:22|) and also strkjv@Matthew:25:46|. Jude:has no mention of Lot.
rwp@Luke:1:62 @{Made signs} (\eneneuon\). Imperfect tense, repeated action as usual when making signs. In strkjv@1:22| the verb used of Zacharias is \dianeun\. {What he would have him called} (\to ti an theloi kaleisthai auto\). Note article \to\ with the indirect question, accusative of general reference. The optative with \an\ is here because it was used in the direct question (cf. strkjv@Acts:17:18|), and is simply retained in the indirect. {What would he wish him to be called?} ({if he could speak}), a conclusion of the fourth-class condition.
rwp@Luke:3:7 @{To the multitude that went out} (\tois exporeuomenois ochlois\). Plural, {Multitudes}. The present participle also notes the repetition of the crowds as does \elegen\ (imperfect), he used to say. strkjv@Matthew:3:7-10| singles out the message of John to the Pharisees and Sadducees, which see for discussion of details. Luke gives a summary of his preaching to the crowds with special replies to these inquiries: the multitudes, 10,11|, the publicans 12,13|, the soldiers 14|. {To be baptized of him} (\baptisthnai hup' autou\). This is the purpose of their coming. strkjv@Matthew:3:7| has simply "to his baptism." John's metaphors are from the wilderness (vipers, fruits, axe, slave boy loosing sandals, fire, fan, thrashing-floor, garner, chaff, stones). {Who warned you?} (\tis hepedeixen humin;\). The verb is like our "suggest" by proof to eye, ear, or brain (Luke:6:47; strkjv@12:5; strkjv@Acts:9:16; strkjv@20:35; strkjv@Matthew:3:7|). Nowhere else in the N.T. though common ancient word (\hupodeiknumi\, show under, point out, give a tip or private hint).
rwp@Luke:3:21 @{When all the people were baptised} (\en ti baptisthnai hapanta ton laon\). The use of the articular aorist infinitive here with \en\ bothers some grammarians and commentators. There is no element of time in the aorist infinitive. It is simply punctiliar action, literally "in the being baptized as to all the people." Luke does not say that all the people were baptized before Jesus came or were baptized at the same time. It is merely a general statement that Jesus was baptized in connexion with or at the time of the baptizing of the people as a whole. {Jesus also having been baptized} (\kai Isou baptisthentos\). Genitive absolute construction, first aorist passive participle. In Luke's sentence the baptism of Jesus is merely introductory to the descent of the Holy Spirit and the voice of the Father. For the narrative of the baptism see strkjv@Mark:1:9; strkjv@Matthew:3:13-16|. {And praying} (\kai proseuchomenou\). Alone in Luke who so often mentions the praying of Jesus. Present participle and so naturally meaning that the heaven was opened while Jesus was praying though not necessarily in answer to his prayer. {The heaven was opened} (\aneichthnai ton ouranon\). First aorist passive infinitive with double augment, whereas the infinitive is not supposed to have any augment. The regular form would be \anoichthnai\ as in D (Codex Bezae). Songs:the augment appears in the future indicative \kateaxei\ (Matthew:12:20|) and the second aorist passive subjunctive \kateagsin\ (John:19:31|). Such unusual forms appear in the _Koin_. This infinitive here with the accusative of general reference is the subject of \egeneto\ (it came to pass). strkjv@Matthew:3:16| uses the same verb, but strkjv@Mark:1:10| has \schizomenous\, rent asunder.
rwp@Luke:4:36 @{Amazement came} (\egeneto thambos\). Mark has \ethambthsan\. {They spake together one with another} (\sunelaloun pros alllous\). Imperfect indicative active and the reciprocal pronoun. Mark has simply the infinitive \sunztein\ (question). {For} (\hoti\). We have here an ambiguous \hoti\ as in strkjv@1:45|, which can be either the relative "that" or the casual \hoti\ "because" or "for," as the Revised Version has it. Either makes good sense. Luke adds here \dunamei\ (with power) to Mark's "authority" (\exousian\). {And they come out} (\exerchontai\). Songs:Luke where Mark has "and they obey him" (\kai upakouousin auti\).
rwp@Luke:5:12 @{Behold} (\kai idou\). Quite a Hebraistic idiom, this use of \kai\ after \egeneto\ (almost like \hoti\) with \idou\ (interjection) and no verb. {Full of leprosy} (\plrs lepras\). strkjv@Mark:1:40| and strkjv@Matthew:8:2| have simply "a leper" which see. Evidently a bad case full of sores and far advanced as Luke the physician notes. The law (Leviticus:13:12f.|) curiously treated advanced cases as less unclean than the earlier stages. {Fell on his face} (\pesn epi prospon\). Second aorist active participle of \pipt\, common verb. strkjv@Mark:1:40| has "kneeling" (\gonupetn\) and strkjv@Matthew:8:40| "worshipped" (\prosekunei\). All three attitudes were possible one after the other. All three Synoptics quote the identical language of the leper and the identical answer of Jesus. His condition of the third class turned on the "will" (\thelis\) of Jesus who at once asserts his will (\thl\) and cleanses him. All three likewise mention the touch (\hpsato\, verse 13|) of Christ's hand on the unclean leper and the instantaneous cure.
rwp@Luke:5:17 @{That} (\kai\). Use of \kai\ = \hoti\ (that) like the Hebrew _wav_, though found in Greek also. {He} (\autos\). Luke sometimes has \autos\ in the nominative as unemphatic "he" as here, not "he himself." {Was teaching} (\n didaskn\). Periphrastic imperfect again like our English idiom. {Were sitting by} (\san kathmenoi\). Periphrastic imperfect again. There is no "by" in the Greek. {Doctors of the law} (\nomodidaskaloi\). A compound word formed after analogy of \hierodidaskalos\, but not found outside of the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, one of the very few words apparently N.T. in usage. It appears here and strkjv@Acts:5:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7|. It is not likely that Luke and Paul made the word, but they simply used the term already in current use to describe teachers and interpreters of the law. Our word "doctor" is Latin for "teacher." These "teachers of the law" are called elsewhere in the Gospels "scribes" (\grammateis\) as in Matthew and Mark (see on ¯Matthew:5:20; strkjv@23:34|) and strkjv@Luke:5:21; strkjv@19:47; strkjv@21:1; strkjv@22:2|. Luke also employs \nomikos\ (one skilled in the law, \nomos\) as in strkjv@10:25|. One thinks of our LL.D. (Doctors of Civil and Canon Law), for both were combined in Jewish law. They were usually Pharisees (mentioned here for the first time in Luke) for which see on ¯Matthew:3:7,20|. Luke will often speak of the Pharisees hereafter. Not all the "Pharisees" were "teachers of the law" so that both terms often occur together as in verse 21| where Luke has separate articles (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\), distinguishing between them, though one article may occur as in strkjv@Matthew:5:20| or no article as here in verse 17|. Luke alone mentions the presence here of these Pharisees and doctors of the law "which were come" (\hoi san elluthotes\, periphrastic past perfect active, {had come}). {Out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem} (\ek pass kms ts Galilaias kai Ioudaias kai Ierousalm\). Edersheim (_Jewish Social Life_) observes that the Jews distinguished Jerusalem as a separate district in Judea. Plummer considers it hyperbole in Luke to use "every village." But one must recall that Jesus had already made one tour of Galilee which stirred the Pharisees and rabbis to active opposition. Judea had already been aroused and Jerusalem was the headquarters of the definite campaign now organized against Jesus. One must bear in mind that strkjv@John:4:1-4| shows that Jesus had already left Jerusalem and Judea because of the jealousy of the Pharisees. They are here on purpose to find fault and to make charges against Jesus. One must not forget that there were many kinds of Pharisees and that not all of them were as bad as these legalistic and punctilious hypocrites who deserved the indictment and exposure of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:23|. Paul himself is a specimen of the finer type of Pharisee which, however, developed into the persecuting fanatic till Jesus changed his whole life. {The power of the Lord was with him to heal} (\dunamis Kuriou n eis to isthai auton\). Songs:the best texts. It is neat Greek, but awkward English: "Then was the power of the Lord for the healing as to him (Jesus)." Here \Kuriou\ refers to Jehovah. {Dunamis} (dynamite) is one of the common words for "miracles" (\dunameis\). What Luke means is that Jesus had the power of the Lord God to heal with. He does not mean that this power was intermittent. He simply calls attention to its presence with Jesus on this occasion.
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@Matthew:10:41 @{In the name of a prophet} (\eis onoma prophtou\). "Because he is a prophet" (Moffatt). In an Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 37 (A.D. 49) we find \onomati eleutherou\ in virtue of being free-born. "He that receiveth a prophet from no ulterior motive, but simply _qua_ prophet (_ut prophetam_, Jer.) would receive a reward in the coming age equal to that of his guest" (McNeile). The use of \eis\ here is to be noted. In reality \eis\ is simply \en\ with the same meaning. It is not proper to say that \eis\ has always to be translated "into." Besides these examples of \eis onoma\ in verses 41| and 43| see strkjv@Matthew:12:41| \eis to krugma In\ (see Robertson's _Grammar_, p. 593). {Unto one of these little ones} (\hena tn mikrn toutn\). Simple believers who are neither apostles, prophets, or particularly righteous, just "learners," "in the name of a disciple" (\eis onoma mathtou\). Alford thinks that some children were present (cf. strkjv@Matthew:18:2-6|).
rwp@Matthew:12:1 @{On the sabbath day through the cornfields} (\tois sabbasin dia tn sporimn\). This paragraph begins exactly like strkjv@11:25| "at that season" (\en ekeini ti kairi\), a general statement with no clear idea of time. Songs:also strkjv@14:1|. The word \kairos\ means a definite and particular time, but we cannot fix it. The word "cornfields" does not mean our maize or Indian corn, but simply fields of grain (wheat or even barley).
rwp@Matthew:12:40 @{The whale} (\tou ktous\). Sea-monster, huge fish. In strkjv@Jonah:2:1| the LXX has \ktei megali\. "Three days and three nights" may simply mean three days in popular speech. Jesus rose "on the third day" (Matthew:16:21|), not "on the fourth day." It is just a fuller form for "after three days" (Mark:8:31; strkjv@10:34|).
rwp@Matthew:13:1 @{On that day} (\en ti hmerai ekeini\). Songs:this group of parables is placed by Matthew on the same day as the blasphemous accusation and the visit of the mother of Jesus. It is called "the Busy Day," not because it was the only one, but simply that so much is told of this day that it serves as a specimen of many others filled to the full with stress and strain. {Sat by the seaside} (\ekathto para tn thalassan\). The accusative case need give no difficulty. Jesus came out of the stuffy house and took his seat (\ekathto\, imperfect) along the shore with the crowds stretched up and down, a picturesque scene.
rwp@Matthew:13:41 @{Out of his kingdom} (\ek ts basileias autou\). Out from the midst of the kingdom, because in every city the good and the bad are scattered and mixed together. Cf. \ek mesou tn dikain\ in strkjv@13:49| "from the midst of the righteous." What this means is that, just as the wheat and the darnel are mixed together in the field till the separation at harvest, so the evil are mixed with the good in the world (the field). Jesus does not mean to say that these "stumbling-blocks" (\ta skandala\) are actually in the Kingdom of heaven and really members of the Kingdom. They are simply mixed in the field with the wheat and God leaves them in the world till the separation comes. Their destiny is "the furnace of fire" (\tn kaminon tou puros\).
rwp@Matthew:14:3 @{For the sake of Herodias} (\dia Hridiada\). The death of John had taken place some time before. The Greek aorists here (\edsen, apetheto\) are not used for past perfects. The Greek aorist simply narrates the event without drawing distinctions in past time. This Herodias was the unlawful wife of Herod Antipas. She was herself a descendant of Herod the Great and had married Herod Philip of Rome, not Philip the Tetrarch. She had divorced him in order to marry Herod Antipas after he had divorced his wife, the daughter of Aretas King of Arabia. It was a nasty mess equal to any of our modern divorces. Her first husband was still alive and marriage with a sister-in-law was forbidden to Jews (Leviticus:18:16|). Because of her Herod Antipas had put John in the prison at Machaerus. The bare fact has been mentioned in strkjv@Matthew:4:12| without the name of the place. See strkjv@11:2| also for the discouragement of John \en ti desmtrii\ (place of bondage), here \en ti phulaki\ (the guard-house). Josephus (_Ant_. xviii. 5.2) tells us that Machaerus is the name of the prison. On a high hill an impregnable fortress had been built. Tristram (_Land of Moab_) says that there are now remains of "two dungeons, one of them deep and its sides scarcely broken in" with "small holes still visible in the masonry where staples of wood and iron had once been fixed. One of these must surely have been the prison-house of John the Baptist." "On this high ridge Herod the Great built an extensive and beautiful palace" (Broadus). "The windows commanded a wide and grand prospect, including the Dead Sea, the course of the Jordan, and Jerusalem" (Edersheim, _Life and Times of Jesus_).
rwp@Matthew:14:15 @{When even was come} (\opsias genomens\). Genitive absolute. Not sunset about 6 P.M. as in strkjv@8:16| and as in strkjv@14:23|, but the first of the two "evenings" beginning at 3 P.M. {The place is desert} (\ermos estin ho topos\). Not a desolate region, simply lonely, comparatively uninhabited with no large towns near. There were "villages" (\kmas\) where the people could buy food, but they would need time to go to them. Probably this is the idea of the disciples when they add: {The time is already past} (\h hra d parlthen\). They must hurry.
rwp@Matthew:14:21 @{Beside women and children} (\chris gunaikn kai paidin\). Perhaps on this occasion there were not so many as usual because of the rush of the crowd around the head of the lake. Matthew adds this item and does not mean that the women and children were not fed, but simply that "the eaters" (\hoi esthiontes\) included five thousand men (\andres\) besides the women and children.
rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{And I also say unto thee} (\k'ag de soi leg\). "The emphasis is not on 'Thou art Peter' over against 'Thou art the Christ,' but on \Kag\: 'The Father hath revealed to thee one truth, and I also tell you another" (McNeile). Jesus calls Peter here by the name that he had said he would have (John:1:42|). Peter (\Petros\) is simply the Greek word for Cephas (Aramaic). Then it was prophecy, now it is fact. In verse 17| Jesus addresses him as "Simon Bar-Jonah," his full patronymic (Aramaic) name. But Jesus has a purpose now in using his nickname "Peter" which he had himself given him. Jesus makes a remarkable play on Peter's name, a pun in fact, that has caused volumes of controversy and endless theological strife. {On this rock} (\epi tauti ti petri\) Jesus says, a ledge or cliff of rock like that in strkjv@7:24| on which the wise man built his house. \Petros\ is usually a smaller detachment of the massive ledge. But too much must not be made of this point since Jesus probably spoke Aramaic to Peter which draws no such distinction (\Kph\). What did Jesus mean by this word-play?
rwp@Revelation:18:6 @{Render as she rendered} (\apodote hs apedken\). Second aorist (effective) active imperative and first aorist (effective) active of \apodidmi\, old and common verb for requital, to give back, the _lex talionis_ which is in the O.T. (Jeremiah:50:15,29; strkjv@51:24,56; strkjv@Psalms:137:8|), and in the N.T. also (Matthew:7:2|). Here the reference is to persecutions by Rome, particularly the martyrdom of the saints (18:24; strkjv@19:2|). {Double the double} (\diplsate ta dipla\). First aorist imperative of \diplo\, old verb (from \diploos\, double, strkjv@Matthew:23:15|), here only in N.T. \Dipl\ is simply the neuter plural accusative (cognate) contract form for \diploa\ (not \dipl\). Requite here in double measure, a full requital (Exodus:22:4,7,9; strkjv@Isaiah:40:2; strkjv@Jeremiah:16:18; strkjv@17:18; strkjv@Zechariah:9:12|). The double recompense was according to the Levitical law. {Which she mingled} (\hi ekerasen\). First aorist active indicative of \kerannumi\. The relative \hi\ is attracted to the locative case of its antecedent \potrii\ (cup), for which see strkjv@14:8,10; strkjv@17:4; strkjv@18:3|. {Mingle unto her double} (\kerasate auti diploun\). First aorist active imperative of the same verb \kerannumi\, with the same idea of double punishment.
rwp@Revelation:21:19 @{Were adorned} (\kekosmmenoi\). Perfect passive participle of \kosme\ as in verse 2|, but without the copula \san\ (were), followed by instrumental case \lithi\ (stone). {With all manner of precious stones} (\panti lithi timii\). "With every precious stone." The list of the twelve stones in verses 19,20| has no necessary mystical meaning. "The writer is simply trying to convey the impression of a radiant and superb structure" (Moffatt). The twelve gems do correspond closely (only eight in common) with the twelve stones on the high priest's breastplate (Exodus:28:17-20; strkjv@39:10ff.; strkjv@Ezekiel:28:13; strkjv@Isaiah:54:11f.|). Charles identifies them with the signs of zodiac in reverse order, a needless performance here. See the stones in strkjv@Revelation:4:3|. These foundation stones are visible. For jasper (\iaspis\) see strkjv@4:3; strkjv@21:11,18; strkjv@Isaiah:54:12|; sapphire (\sappheiros\) see strkjv@Exodus:24:10;. strkjv@Isaiah:54:11| (possibly the \lapis lazuli\ of Turkestan); chalcedony (\chalkdn\) we have no other reference in N.T. or LXX (described by Pliny, H.N. XXXIII.21), possibly a green silicate of copper from near Chalcedon; emerald (\smaragdos\) here only in N.T., see strkjv@4:3| \smaragdinos\, and like it a green stone.
rwp@Revelation:21:23 @{To shine upon it} (\hina phainsin auti\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \phain\, to keep on shining. Light is always a problem in our cities. See strkjv@Isaiah:60:19ff|. {Did lighten it} (\ephtisen autn\). First aorist active indicative of \phtiz\, to illumine, old verb from \phs\ (Luke:11:36|). If the sun and moon did shine, they would give no added light in the presence of the Shekinah Glory of God. See verse 11| for "the glory of God." Cf. strkjv@18:1; strkjv@21:3|. "Their splendour is simply put to shame by the glory of God Himself" (Charles). {And the lamp thereof is the Lamb} (\kai ho luchnos auts to arnion\). Charles takes \ho luchnos\ as predicate, "and the Lamb is the lamp thereof." Bousset thinks that John means to compare Christ to the moon the lesser light (Genesis:1:16|), but that contrast is not necessary. Swete sees Christ as the one lamp for all in contrast with the many \luchniai\ of the churches on earth (1:12,20|). "No words could more clearly demonstrate the purely spiritual character of St. John's conception of the New Jerusalem" (Swete).
rwp@Info_Revelation @ EMPEROR WORSHIP AS THE OCCASION FOR JOHN'S APOCALYPSE There is no doubt at all that the emperor cult (emperor worship) played a main part in the persecution of the Christians that was the occasion for this great Christian apocalypse. The book itself bears ample witness to this fact, if the two beasts refer to the Roman power as the agent of Satan. It is not possible to single out each individual emperor in the graphic picture. Most would take the dragon to be Satan and the first and the second beasts to be the imperial and provincial Roman power. The Roman emperors posed as gods and did the work of Satan. In particular there were two persecuting emperors (Nero and Domitian) who were responsible for many martyrs for Christ. But emperor worship began before Nero. Julius Caesar was worshipped in the provinces. Octavius was called Augustus (\Sebastos\, Reverend). The crazy Emperor Caius Caligula not simply claimed to be divine, but actually demanded that his statue be set up for worship in the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem. He was killed in January A.D. 41 before he could execute his dire purpose. But the madcap Nero likewise demanded worship and blamed in A.D. 64 the burning of Rome on the Christians, though guilty of it himself. He set the style for persecuting Christians, which slumbered on and burst into flames again under Domitian, who had himself commonly termed _Dominus ac Deus noster_ (Our Lord and God). The worship of the emperor did not disturb the worshippers of other gods save the Jews and the Christians, and in particular the Christians were persecuted after the burning of Rome when they were distinguished from the Jews. Up till then Christians were regarded (as by Gallio in Corinth) as a variety of Jews and so entitled to tolerance as a _religio licita_, but they had no standing in law by themselves and their refusal to worship the emperor early gave offence, as Paul indicates in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3|. It was \Kurios Isous\ or \Kurios Kaisar\. On this very issue Polycarp lost his life. The emperors as a rule were tolerant about it, save Nero and Domitian, who was called Nero _redivivus_, or Nero back again. Trajan in his famous letter to Pliny advised tolerance except in stubborn cases, when the Christians had to be put to death. After Nero it was a crime to be a Christian and all sorts of slanders about them were circulated. We have seen already in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3ff.|, the man of sin who sets himself above God as the object of worship. We have seen also in strkjv@1John:2:18,22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7| the term antichrist applied apparently to Gnostic heretics. One may wonder if, as Beckwith argues, in the Apocalypse the man of sin and the antichrist are united in the beast.
rwp@Romans:2:25 @{If thou be a doer of the law} (\ean nomon prasseis\). Condition of third class and the present (continued action) subjunctive of \prass\, a verb meaning to do as a habit. {Is become uncircumcision} (\akrobustia gegonen\). The Jew is then like the Gentile, with no privilege at all. Circumcision was simply the seal of the covenant relation of Israel with God.
rwp@Romans:3:3 @{For what if?} (\ti gar ei?\). But Westcott and Hort print it, \Ti gar? ei\. See strkjv@Phillipians:1:18| for this exclamatory use of \ti gar\ (for how? How stands the case?). {Some were without faith} (\pistsan\). First aorist active indicative of \apiste\, old verb, to disbelieve. This is the common N.T. meaning (Luke:24:11,41; strkjv@Acts:28:24; strkjv@Romans:4:20|). Some of them "disbelieved," these "depositaries and guardians of revelation" (Denney). But the word also means to be unfaithful to one's trust and Lightfoot argues for that idea here and in strkjv@2Timothy:2:13|. The Revised Version renders it "faithless" there. Either makes sense here and both ideas are true of some of the Jews, especially concerning the Messianic promises and Jesus. {The faithfulness of God} (\tn pistin tou theou\). Undoubtedly \pistis\ has this sense here and not "faith." God has been faithful (2Timothy:2:13|) whether the Jews (some of them) were simply disbelievers or untrue to their trust. Paul can use the words in two senses in verse 3|, but there is no real objection to taking \pistsan, apistian, pistin\, all to refer to faithfulness rather than just faith.
rwp@Romans:4:11 @{The sign of circumcision} (\smeion peritoms\). It is the genitive of apposition, circumcision being the sign. {A seal of the righteousness of the faith} (\sphragida ts dikaiosuns ts pistes\). \Sphragis\ is old word for the seal placed on books (Revelation:5:1|), for a signet-ring (Revelation:7:2|), the stamp made by the seal (2Timothy:2:19|), that by which anything is confirmed (1Corinthians:9:2|) as here. The circumcision did not convey the righteousness, but only gave outward confirmation. It came by faith and "the faith which he had while in uncircumcision" (\ts en ti akrobustii\), "the in the state of uncircumcision faith." Whatever parallel exists between baptism and circumcision as here stated by Paul argues for faith before baptism and for baptism as the sign and seal of the faith already had before baptism. {That he might be} (\eis to einai auton\). This idiom may be God's purpose (contemplated result) as in \eis to logisthnai\ below, or even actual result (so that he was) as in strkjv@1:20|. {Though they be in uncircumcision} (\di' akrobustias\). Simply, "of those who believe while in the condition of uncircumcision."
rwp@Romans:4:25 @{For our justification} (\dia tn dikaisin hmn\). The first clause (\paredoth dia ta paraptmata\) is from strkjv@Isaiah:53:12|. The first \dia\ with \paraptmata\ is probably retrospective, though it will make sense as prospective (to make atonement for our transgressions). The second \dia\ is quite clearly prospective with a view to our justification. Paul does not mean to separate the resurrection from the death of Christ in the work of atonement, but simply to show that the resurrection is at one with the death on the Cross in proof of Christ's claims.
rwp@Romans:6:18 @{Ye became servants of righteousness} (\edoulthte ti dikaiosuni\). First aorist passive indicative of \doulo\, to enslave. "Ye were made slaves to righteousness." You have simply changed masters, no longer slaves of sin (set free from that tyrant), but ye are slaves of righteousness. There is no middle ground, no "no man's land" in this war.
rwp@Romans:9:8 @{The children of the promise} (\ta tekna ts epaggelias\). Not through Ishmael, but through Isaac. Only the children of the promise are "children of God" (\tekna tou theou\) in the full sense. He is not speaking of Christians here, but simply showing that the privileges of the Jews were not due to their physical descent from Abraham. Cf. strkjv@Luke:3:8|.
rwp@Romans:11:20 @{Well} (\kals\). Perhaps ironical, though Paul may simply admit the statement (cf. strkjv@Mark:12:32|) and show the Gentile his real situation. {By unbelief} (\ti apistii\) {--by faith} (\pistei\). Instrumental case with both contrasted words (by unbelief, by belief).
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}