OT-LAW.filter - rwp Loved:
rwp@
1Corinthians:8:3 @{The same is known of him} (\houtos egnstai hup' autou\). Loving God (condition of first class again) is the way to come to know God. It is not certain whether \houtos\ refers to the man who loves God or to God who is loved. Both are true. God knows those that are his (2Timothy:2:19; strkjv@Exodus:33:12|). Those who know God are known of God (Galatians:4:9|). We love God because he first loved us (1John:4:19|). But here Paul uses both ideas and both verbs. \Egnstai\ is perfect passive indicative of \ginsk\, an abiding state of recognition by (\hup'\) God. No one is acquainted with God who does not love him (1John:4:8|). God sets the seal of his favour on the one who loves him. Songs:much for the principle.
rwp@1John:2:7 @{Beloved} (\agaptoi\). First instance of this favourite form of address in these Epistles (3:2,21; strkjv@4:1,7; strkjv@3John:1,2,5,11|). {No new commandment} (\ouk entoln kainn\). Not novel or new in kind (\kainn\ as distinct from \neos\, new in time, for which distinction see strkjv@Luke:5:33-38|). {But an old commandment} (\all' entoln palaian\). Ancient as opposed both to \kainos\ and \neos\. The Mosaic law taught love for one's neighbours and Christ taught love even of enemies. {Which ye had} (\hn eichete\). Imperfect active, reaching back to the beginning of their Christian lives (\ap' archs\). They had heard it expressly from Jesus (John:13:34|), who, however, calls it "a new commandment."
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@1John:4:10 @{Not that} (\ouch hoti\) {--but that} (\all' hoti\). Sharp contrast as in strkjv@John:7:22; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:9; strkjv@Phillipians:4:17|. {We loved} (\gapsamen\). First aorist active indicative, but B reads \gapkamen\ (perfect active, we have loved). {He} (\autos\). Emphatic nominative (God). {To be the propitiation} (\hilasmon\). Merely predicate accusative in apposition with \huion\ (Son). For the word see strkjv@2:2; strkjv@Romans:3:25| for \hilastrion\, and for \peri\ see also strkjv@2:2|.
rwp@1John:4:11 @{If God so loved us} (\ei houts ho theos gapsen hmas\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and the first aorist active indicative. As in strkjv@John:3:16|, so here \houts\ emphasises the manifestation of God's love both in its manner and in its extent (Romans:8:32|). {Ought} (\opheilomen\). As in strkjv@2:6|. _Noblesse oblige_. "Keep on loving," (\agapin\) as in strkjv@3:11|.
rwp@1John:4:19 @{He first} (\autos prtos\). Note \prtos\ (nominative), not \prton\, as in strkjv@John:20:4,8|. God loved us {before} we loved him (John:3:16|). Our love is in response to his love for us. \Agapmen\ is indicative (we love), not subjunctive (let us love) of the same form. There is no object expressed here.
rwp@1Peter:4:8 @{Above all things} (\pro pantn\). See this phrase in strkjv@James:5:12|. {Being fervent} (\ekten echontes\). Present active participle of \echontes\ and predicate accusative of adjective \ektens\ (from \ektein\, to stretch out), stretched out, here only in N.T., "holding intent you love among yourselves." {For love covereth a multitude of sins} (\hoti agap kaluptei plthos hamartin\). See strkjv@James:5:20| for meaning, sins of the one loved, not of the one loving.
rwp@1Thessalonians:1:4 @{Knowing} (\eidotes\). Second perfect active participle of \oida\ (\eidon\), a so-called causal participle=since we know, the third participle with the principal verb \eucharistoumen\, the Greek being fond of the circumstantial participle and lengthening sentences thereby (Robertson, _Grammar_, P. 1128). {Beloved by God} (\gapmenoi hupo [tou] theou\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa\, the verb so common in the N.T. for the highest kind of love. Paul is not content with the use of \adelphoi\ here (often in this Epistle as strkjv@2:1,14,17; strkjv@3:7; strkjv@4:1,10|), but adds this affectionate phrase nowhere else in the N.T. in this form (cf. strkjv@Jude:1:3|) though in Sirach strkjv@45:1 and on the Rosetta Stone. But in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:13| he quotes "beloved by the Lord" from strkjv@Deuteronomy:33:12|. The use of \adelphoi\ for members of the same brotherhood can be derived from the Jewish custom (Acts:2:29,37|) and the habit of Jesus (Matthew:12:48|) and is amply illustrated in the papyri for burial clubs and other orders and guilds (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). {Your election} (\tn eklogn humn\). That is the election of you by God. It is an old word from \eklegomai\ used by Jesus of his choice of the twelve disciples (John:15:16|) and by Paul of God's eternal selection (Ephesians:1:4|). The word \eklog\ is not in the LXX and only seven times in the N.T. and always of God's choice of men (Acts:9:15; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:9:11; strkjv@11:5,7,58; strkjv@2Peter:1:10|). The divine \eklog\ was manifested in the Christian qualities of verse 3| (Moffatt).
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:8 @{Even so, being affectionately desirous of you} (\houts omeiromenoi humn\). Clearly the correct text rather than \himeiromenoi\ from \himeir\, old verb to long for. But the verb \homeiromai\ (Westcott and Hort _om_., smooth breathing) occurs nowhere else except MSS. in strkjv@Job:3:21; strkjv@Psalms:62:2| (Symmachus) and the Lycaonian sepulchral inscription (4th cent. A.D.) about the sorrowing parents \homeiromenoi peri paidos\, {greatly desiring their son} (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Moulton suggests that it comes from a root \smer\, remember, and that \o-\ is a derelict preposition \o\ like \o-duromai, o-kell, -keanos\. Wohlenberg (Zahn, _Kommentar_) calls the word "a term of endearment," "derived from the language of the nursery" (Milligan). {We were well pleased} (\udokoumen\). Imperfect active of \eudoke\, common verb in later Greek and in N.T. (see on strkjv@Matthew:3:17|), picturing Paul's idea of their attitude while in Thessalonica. Paul often has it with the infinitive as here. {To impart} (\metadounai\). Second aorist active infinitive of \metadidmi\, old verb to share with (see on strkjv@Luke:3:11|). Possible zeugma with {souls} (\psuchas\), though Lightfoot renders "lives." Paul and his associates held nothing back. {Because ye were become very dear to us} (\dioti agaptoi hmin egenthte\). Note \dioti\ (double cause, \dia, hoti\, for that), use of \ginomai\ again for become, and dative \hmin\ with verbal \agaptoi\, beloved and so dear. A beautiful picture of the growth of Paul's affection for them as should be true with every pastor.
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:15 @{Who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets} (\tn kai ton Kurion apokteinantn Isoun kai tous prophtas\). First aorist active participle of \apoktein\. Vivid justification of his praise of the churches in Judea. The Jews killed the prophets before the Lord Jesus who reminded them of their guilt (Matthew:23:29|). Paul, as Peter (Acts:2:23|), lays the guilt of the death of Christ on the Jews. {And drove us out} (\kai hms ekdixantn\). An old verb to drive out or banish, to chase out as if a wild beast. Only here in N.T. It is Paul's vivid description of the scene told in strkjv@Acts:17:5ff.| when the rabbis and the hoodlums from the agora chased him out of Thessalonica by the help of the politarchs. {Please not God} (\Thei m areskontn\). The rabbis and Jews thought that they were pleasing God by so doing as Paul did when he ravaged the young church in Jerusalem. But Paul knows better now. {And are contrary to all men} (\kai pasin anthrpois enantin\). Dative case with the adjective \enantin\ (old and common word, face to face, opposite). It seems like a bitter word about Paul's countrymen whom he really loved (Romans:9:1-5; strkjv@10:1-6|), but Paul knew only too well the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile as he shows in strkjv@Ephesians:2| and which only the Cross of Christ can break down. Tacitus (_Hist_. V. 5) says that the Jews are _adversus omnes alios hostile odium_.
rwp@Info_1Timothy @ FIRST TIMOTHY PROBABLY A.D. 65 FROM MACEDONIA BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION Assuming the Pauline authorship the facts shape up after this fashion. Paul had been in Ephesus (1Timothy:1:3|) after his arrival from Rome, which was certainly before the burning of Rome in A.D. 64. He had left Timothy in charge of the work in Ephesus and has gone on into Macedonia (1Timothy:1:3|), possibly to Philippi as he had hoped (Phillipians:2:24|). He wishes to help Timothy meet the problems of doctrine (against the Gnostics), discipline, and church training which are increasingly urgent. There are personal touches of a natural kind about Timothy's own growth and leadership. There are wise words here from the greatest of all preachers to a young minister whom Paul loved. strkjv@1Timothy:1:1 @{According to the commandment} (\kat' epitagn\). A late _Koin_ word (Polybius, Diodorus), but a Pauline word also in N.T. This very idiom ("by way of command") in strkjv@1Corinthians:7:6; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:8; strkjv@Romans:16:26; strkjv@1Timothy:1:1; strkjv@Titus:1:3|. Paul means to say that he is an apostle under orders. {Of God our Saviour} (\theou stros hmn\). Genitive case with \epitagn\. In the LXX \str\ (old word from \sz\ for agent in saving, applied to deities, princes, kings, etc.) occurs 20 times, all but two to God. The Romans called the emperor "Saviour God." In the N.T. the designation of God as Saviour is peculiar to strkjv@Luke:1:47; strkjv@Jude:1:25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:3; strkjv@2:3; strkjv@4:10; strkjv@Titus:1:3; strkjv@2:10; strkjv@3:4|. In the other Epistles Paul uses it of Christ (Phillipians:3:20; strkjv@Ephesians:5:23|) as in strkjv@2Timothy:1:10|. In strkjv@2Peter:1:1| we have "our God and Saviour Jesus Christ" as in strkjv@Titus:2:13|. {Our hope} (\ts elpidos hmn\). Like strkjv@Colossians:1:27|. More than the author and object of hope, "its very substance and foundation" (Ellicott).
rwp@2Corinthians:10:10 @{They say} (\phasin\). Reading of B old Latin Vulgate, but Westcott and Hort prefer \phsin\ (says one, the leader). This charge Paul quotes directly. {Weighty and strong} (\bareiai kai ischurai\). These adjectives can be uncomplimentary and mean "severe and violent" instead of "impressive and vigorous." The adjectives bear either sense. {His bodily presence} (\h parousia tou smatos\). This certainly is uncomplimentary. "The presence of his body." It seems clear that Paul did not have a commanding appearance like that of Barnabas (Acts:14:12|). He had some physical defect of the eyes (Galatians:4:14|) and a thorn in the flesh (2Corinthians:12:7|). In the second century _Acts of Paul and Thecla_ he is pictured as small, short, bow-legged, with eye-brows knit together, and an aquiline nose. A forgery of the fourth century in the name of Lucian describes Paul as "the bald-headed, hook-nosed Galilean." However that may be, his accusers sneered at his personal appearance as "weak" (\asthens\). {His speech of no account} (\ho logos exouthenmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \exouthene\, to treat as nothing (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:1:28|). The Corinthians (some of them) cared more for the brilliant eloquence of Apollos and did not find Paul a trained rhetorician (1Corinthians:1:17; strkjv@2:1,4; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:6|). He made different impressions on different people. "Seldom has any one been at once so ardently hated and so passionately loved as St. Paul" (Deissmann, _St. Paul_, p. 70). "At one time he seemed like a man, and at another he seemed like an angel" (_Acts of Paul and Thecla_). He spoke like a god at Lystra (Acts:14:8-12|), but Eutychus went to sleep on him (Acts:20:9|). Evidently Paul winced under this biting criticism of his looks and speech.
rwp@Info_2John @ SECOND JOHN ABOUT A.D. 85 TO 90 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION There is little to add to what was said about the First Epistle except that here the author terms himself "the elder" (\ho presbuteros\) and writes to "the elect lady" (\eklekti kurii\). There is dispute about both of these titles. Some hold that it is the mythical "presbyter John" of whom Papias may speak, if so understood, but whose very existence is disproved by Dom Chapman in _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). Peter the apostle (1Peter:1:1|) calls himself "fellow-elder" (\sunpresbuteros\) with the other elders (1Peter:5:1|). The word referred originally to age (Luke:15:25|), then to rank or office as in the Sanhedrin (Matthew:16:21; strkjv@Acts:6:12|) and in the Christian churches (Acts:11:30; strkjv@20:17; strkjv@1Timothy:5:17,19|) as here also. A few even deny that the author is the same as in the First Epistle of John, but just an imitator. But the bulk of modern scholarly opinion agrees that the same man wrote all three Epistles and the Fourth Gospel (the Beloved Disciple, and many still say the Apostle John) whatever is true of the Apocalypse. There is no way of deciding whether "the elect lady" is a woman or a church. The obvious way of taking it is to a woman of distinction in one of the churches, as is true of "the co-elect lady in Babylon" (1Peter:5:13|), Peter's wife, who travelled with him (1Corinthians:9:5|). Some even take \kuria\ to be the name of the lady (Cyria). Some also take it to be "Eklecta the lady." Dr. Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 31) holds that Pergamum is the church to which the letter was sent. The same commentaries treat I, II, and III John as a rule, though Poggel has a book on II, III John (1896) and Bresky (1906) has _Das Verhaltnis des Zweiten Johannesbriefes zum dritten_. Dr. J. Rendel Harris has an interesting article in _The Expositor_ of London for March, 1901, on "The Problem of the Address to the Second Epistle of John," in which he argues from papyri examples that \kuria\ here means "my dear" or "my lady." But Findlay (_Fellowship in the Life Eternal_, p. 26) argues that "the qualifying adjunct 'elect' lifts us into the region of Christian calling and dignity." It is not certain that II John was written after I John, though probable. Origen rejected it and the Peshitta Syriac does not have II and III John. strkjv@2John:1:1 @{And her children} (\kai tois teknois auts\). As with \eklekt kuria\, so here \tekna\ may be understood either literally as in strkjv@1Timothy:3:4|, or spiritually, as in strkjv@Galatians:4:19,25; strkjv@1Timothy:1:2|. For the spiritual sense in \teknia\ see strkjv@1John:2:1,12|. {Whom} (\hous\). Masculine accusative plural, though \teknois\ is neuter plural (dative), construction according to sense, not according to grammatical gender, "embracing the mother and the children of both sexes" (Vincent). See thus \hous\ in strkjv@Galatians:4:19|. {I} (\Eg\). Though \ho presbuteros\ is third person, he passes at once after the Greek idiom to the first and there is also special emphasis here in the use of \agap\ with the addition of \en altheii\ (in truth, in the highest sphere, as in strkjv@John:17:19; strkjv@3John:1:1|) and \ouk eg monos\ (not I only, "not I alone"). Brooke argues that this language is unsuitable if to a single family and not to a church. But Paul employs this very phrase in sending greetings to Prisca and Aquila (Romans:16:4|). {That know} (\hoi egnkotes\). Perfect active articular participle of \ginsk\, "those that have come to know and still know."
rwp@2Peter:1:19 @{The word of prophecy} (\ton prophtikon logon\). "The prophetic word." Cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:10|, a reference to all the Messianic prophecies. {Made more sure} (\bebaioteron\). Predicate accusative of the comparative adjective \bebaios\ (2Peter:1:10|). The Transfiguration scene confirmed the Messianic prophecies and made clear the deity of Jesus Christ as God's Beloved Son. Some with less likelihood take Peter to mean that the word of prophecy is a surer confirmation of Christ's deity than the Transfiguration. {Whereunto} (\hi\). Dative of the relative referring to "the prophetic word made more sure." {That ye take heed} (\prosechontes\). Present active participle with \noun\ (mind) understood, "holding your mind upon" with the dative (\hi\). {As unto a lamp} (\hs luchni\). Dative also after \prosechontes\ of \luchnos\, old word (Matthew:5:15|). {Shining} (\phainonti\). Dative also present active participle of \phain\, to shine (John:1:5|). Songs:of the Baptist (John:5:35|). {In a dark place} (\en auchmri topi\). Old adjective, parched, squalid, dirty, dark, murky, here only in N.T., though in Aristotle and on tombstone for a boy. {Until the day dawn} (\hes hou hmera diaugasi\). First aorist active subjunctive of \diaugaz\ with temporal conjunction \hes hou\, usual construction for future time. Late compound verb \diaugaz\ (Polybius, Plutarch, papyri) from \dia\ and \aug\, to shine through, here only in N.T. {The day-star} (\phsphoros\). Old compound adjective (\phs\, light, \pher\, to bring), light-bringing, light-bearer (Lucifer) applied to Venus as the morning star. Our word \phosphorus\ is this word. In the LXX \hesphoros\ occurs. Cf. strkjv@Malachi:4:2; strkjv@Luke:1:76-79; strkjv@Revelation:22:16| for "dawn" applied to the Messiah. {Arise} (\anateili\). First aorist active subjunctive of \anatell\ (James:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:5:45|).
rwp@2Peter:2:15 @{Forsaking} (\kataleipontes\). Present active participle of \kataleip\ (continually leaving) or \katalipontes\ (second aorist active), having left. {The right way} (\eutheian hodon\). "The straight way" of strkjv@1Samuel:12:23| (cf. strkjv@Matthew:7:13f.| for this use of \hodos\), "the way of truth" (2:2|). {They went astray} (\eplanthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \plana\, like strkjv@Mark:12:24|. {The way of Balaam} (\ti hodi tou Balaam\). Associative instrumental case after \exakolouthsantes\, for which verb see strkjv@1:16; strkjv@2:2|. These false teachers, as shown in verse 13|, followed the way of Balaam, "who loved the hire of wrong-doing" (\hos misthon adikias gapsen\).
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@2Peter:3:15 @{In his sight} (\auti\). Ethical dative. Referring to Christ. {Is salvation} (\strian\). Predicate accusative after \hgeisthe\ in apposition with \makrothumian\ (long-suffering), an opportunity for repentance (cf. strkjv@1Peter:3:20|). The Lord here is Christ. {Our beloved brother Paul} (\ho agaptos adelphos Paulos\). Paul applies the verbal \agaptos\ (beloved) to Epaphras (Colossians:1:7|), Onesimus (Colossians:4:9; strkjv@Philemon:1:16|), to Tychicus (Colossians:4:7; strkjv@Ephesians:6:21|), and to four brethren in strkjv@Romans:16| (Epainetus strkjv@Romans:16:5|, Ampliatus strkjv@Romans:16:8|, Stachys strkjv@Romans:16:9|, Persis strkjv@Romans:16:12|). It is not surprising for Peter to use it of Paul in view of Gal strkjv@2:9f.|, in spite of strkjv@Galatians:2:11-14|. {Given to him} (\dotheisan auti\). First aorist passive participle of \didmi\ with dative case. Peter claimed wisdom for himself, but recognises that Paul had the gift also. His language here may have caution in it as well as commendation. "St. Peter speaks of him with affection and respect, yet maintains the right to criticise" (Bigg).
rwp@2Timothy:1:2 @{Beloved} (\agaptoi\). Instead of \gnsii\ (genuine) in strkjv@1Timothy:1:2|. He had already called Timothy \agapton\ (verbal adjective of \agapa\) in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:17|, an incidental and strong proof that it is Paul who is writing here. This argument applies to each of the Pastorals for Paul is known by other sources (Acts and previous Pauline Epistles) to sustain precisely the affectionate relation toward Timothy and Titus shown in the Pastorals.
rwp@2Timothy:4:8 @{Henceforth} (\loipon\). Accusative case, "for the rest." {There is laid up for me} (\apokeitai moi\). Present passive of \apokeimai\, old verb, to be laid away. See strkjv@Colossians:1:5| for the hope laid away. Paul's "crown of righteousness" (\ho ts dikaiosuns stephanos\, genitive of apposition, the crown that consists in righteousness and is also the reward for righteousness, the victor's crown as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:25| which see) "is laid away" for him. {At that day} (\en ekeini ti hmeri\). That great and blessed day (1:12,18|). {The righteous judge} (\ho dikaios krits\). "The just judge," the umpire who makes no mistakes who judges us all (2Corinthians:5:10|). {Shall give me} (\apodsei moi\). Future active of \apodidmi\. "Will give back" as in strkjv@Romans:2:6| and in full. {But also to all them that have loved his appearing} (\alla psin tois gapkosin tn epiphaneian autou\). Dative case of the perfect active participle of \agapa\, to love, who have loved and still love his second coming. \Epiphaneia\ here can as in strkjv@1:10| be interpreted of Christ's Incarnation.
rwp@2Timothy:4:13 @{The cloke} (\tn phelonn\). More common form \pheilon\. By metathesis for \phainol\, Latin _paenula_, though which language transliterated the word into the other is not known. The meaning is also uncertain, though probably "cloke" as there are so many papyri examples in that sense (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Milligan (N.T. _Documents_, p. 20) had previously urged "book wrap" as probable but he changed his mind and rightly so. {With Carpus} (\para Karpi\). "Beside Carpus," at his house. Not mentioned elsewhere. Probably a visit to Troas after Paul's return from Crete. {The books} (\ta biblia\). Probably papyrus rolls. One can only guess what rolls the old preacher longs to have with him, probably copies of Old Testament books, possibly copies of his own letters, and other books used and loved. The old preacher can be happy with his books. {Especially the parchments} (\malista tas membranas\). Latin _membrana_. The dressed skins were first made at Pergamum and so termed "parchments." These in particular would likely be copies of Old Testament books, parchment being more expensive than papyrus, possibly even copies of Christ's sayings (Luke:1:1-4|). We recall that in strkjv@Acts:26:24| Festus referred to Paul's learning (\ta grammata\). He would not waste his time in prison.
rwp@Info_3John THIRD JOHN ABOUT A.D. 85 TO 90 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION Certainly III John is addressed to an individual, not to a church, though which Gaius we do not know. There are three friends of Paul with this name; Gaius of Corinth (1Corinthians:1:14|), Gaius of Macedonia (Acts:19:29|), Gaius of Derbe (Acts:20:4|), but it is unlikely that this Gaius of Pergamum (Findlay would call him) is either of these, though the _Apostolical Constitutions_ does identify him with Gaius of Derbe. It is possible that in strkjv@3John:1:9| there is an allusion to II John and, if so, then both letters went to individuals in the same church (one a loyal woman, the other a loyal man). Three persons are sharply sketched in III John (Gaius, Diotrephes, Demetrius). Gaius is the dependable layman in the church, Diotrephes the dominating official, Demetrius the kindly messenger from Ephesus with the letter, a vivid picture of early church life and missionary work. John is at Ephesus, the last of the apostles, and with an eagle's eye surveys the work in Asia Minor. The same Gnostic deceivers are at work as in the other Johannine Epistles. Pergamum is described in strkjv@Revelation:2:13| as the place "where Satan's throne is." strkjv@3John:1:1 @{The beloved} (\ti agapti\). Four times in this short letter this verbal adjective is used of Gaius (here, 2,5,11|). See strkjv@2John:1:1| for the same phrase here, "whom I love in truth."
rwp@Acts:15:25 @{It seemed good unto us} (\edoxen hmin\). See statement by Luke in verse 22|, and now this definite decision is in the epistle itself. It is repeated in verse 28|. {Having come to one accord} (\genomenois homothumadon\). On this adverb, common in Acts, see on ¯1:14|. But \genomenois\ clearly means that the final unity was the result of the Conference (private and public talks). The Judaizers are here brushed to one side as the defeated disturbers that they really were who had lacked the courage to vote against the majority. {To choose out men and send them} (\eklexamenois andras pempsai\ A B L, though Aleph C D read \eklexamenous\ as in verse 22|). Precisely the same idiom as in verse 22|, "having chosen out to send." {With our beloved Barnabas and Paul} (\sun tois agaptois hmn Barnabi kai Pauli\). The verbal adjective \agaptois\ (common in the N.T.) definitely sets the seal of warm approval on Barnabas and Paul. Paul (Galatians:2:9|) confirms this by his statement concerning the right hand of fellowship given.
rwp@Acts:16:1 @{And he came also to Derbe and Lystra} (\katntsen de kai eis Derbn kai eis Lustran\). First aorist active of \katanta\, late verb to come down to, to arrive at. He struck Derbe first of the places in the first tour which was the last city reached then. {Timothy} (\Timotheos\). Apparently a native of Lystra ("there," \ekei\), his Hebrew mother named Eunice and grandmother Lois (2Timothy:1:5|) and his Greek father's name not known. He may have been a proselyte, but not necessarily so as Timothy was taught the Scriptures by his mother and grandmother (2Timothy:3:15|), and, if a proselyte, he would have had Timothy circumcised. It is idle to ask if Paul came on purpose to get Timothy to take Mark's place. Probably Timothy was about eighteen years of age, a convert of Paul's former visit a few years before (1Timothy:1:2|) and still young twelve years later (1Timothy:4:12|). Paul loved him devotedly (1Timothy:1:3; strkjv@5:23; strkjv@2Timothy:3:15; strkjv@Phillipians:2:19f.|). It is a glorious discovery to find a real young preacher for Christ's work.
rwp@Acts:17:10 @{Immediately by night} (\euthes dia nuktos\). Paul's work had not been in vain in Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:1:7f.; strkjv@2:13,20|). Paul loved the church here. Two of them, Aristarchus and Secundus, will accompany him to Jerusalem (Acts:20:4|) and Aristarchus will go on with him to Rome (27:2|). Plainly Paul and Silas had been in hiding in Thessalonica and in real danger. After his departure severe persecution came to the Christians in Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:2:14; strkjv@3:1-5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:6|). It is possible that there was an escort of Gentile converts with Paul and Silas on this night journey to Beroea which was about fifty miles southwest from Thessalonica near Pella in another district of Macedonia (Emathia). There is a modern town there of some 6,000 people. {Went} (\apiesan\). Imperfect third plural active of \apeimi\, old verb to go away, here alone in the N.T. A literary, almost Atticistic, form instead of \aplthon\. {Into the synagogue of the Jews} (\eis tn sunaggn tn Ioudain\). Paul's usual custom and he lost no time about it. Enough Jews here to have a synagogue.
rwp@Acts:21:6 @{Beach} (\aigialon\). As in strkjv@Matthew:13:2| which see. This scene is in public as at Miletus, but they did not care. {Bade each other farewell} (\apespasametha alllous\). First aorist middle of \apaspazomai\. Rare compound, here alone in the N.T. Tender scene, but "no bonds of long comradeship, none of the clinging love" (Furneaux) seen at Miletus (Acts:20:37f.|). {Home again} (\eis ta idia\). To their own places as of the Beloved Disciple in strkjv@John:19:27| and of Jesus in strkjv@John:1:11|. This idiom in the papyri also.
rwp@Colossians:1:13 @{Delivered} (\erusato\). First aorist middle indicative of \ruomai\, old verb, to rescue. This appositional relative clause further describes God the Father's redemptive work and marks the transition to the wonderful picture of the person and work of Christ in nature and grace in verses 14-20|, a full and final answer to the Gnostic depreciation of Jesus Christ by speculative philosophy and to all modern efforts after a "reduced" picture of Christ. God rescued us out from (\ek\) the power (\exousias\) of the kingdom of darkness (\skotous\) in which we were held as slaves. {Translated} (\metestsen\). First aorist active indicative of \methistmi\ and transitive (not intransitive like second aorist \metest\). Old word. See strkjv@1Corinthians:13:2|. Changed us from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light. {Of the Son of his love} (\tou huiou ts agaps autou\). Probably objective genitive (\agaps\), the Son who is the object of the Father's love like \agaptos\ (beloved) in strkjv@Matthew:3:17|. Others would take it as describing love as the origin of the Son which is true, but hardly pertinent here. But Paul here rules out the whole system of aeons and angels that the Gnostics placed above Christ. It is Christ's Kingdom in which he is King. He has moral and spiritual sovereignty.
rwp@Colossians:3:12 @{Put on therefore} (\endusasthe oun\). First aorist middle imperative of \endun\ (verse 10|). He explains and applies (\oun\ therefore) the figure of "the new man" as "the new garment." {As God's elect} (\hs eklektoi tou theou\). Same phrase in strkjv@Romans:8:33; strkjv@Titus:1:1|. In the Gospels a distinction exists between \kltos\ and \eklektos\ (Matthew:24:22,24,31|), but no distinction appears in Paul's writings. Here further described as "holy and beloved" (\hagioi kai gapmenoi\). The items in the new clothing for the new man in Christ Paul now gives in contrast with what was put off (3:8|). The garments include a heart of compassion (\splagchna oiktirmou\, the nobler _viscera_ as the seat of emotion as in strkjv@Luke:1:78; strkjv@Phillipians:1:8|), kindness (\chrstotta\, as in strkjv@Galatians:5:22|), humility (\tapeinophrosunn\, in the good sense as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:3|), meekness (\prautta\, in strkjv@Galatians:5:23| and in strkjv@Ephesians:4:2| also with \tapeinophrosun\), long-suffering (\makrothumian\, in strkjv@Galatians:5:22; strkjv@Colossians:1:11; strkjv@James:5:10|).
rwp@Colossians:4:7 @{All my affairs} (\ta kat' eme panta\). "All the things relating to me." The accusative case the object of \gnrisei\. The same idiom in strkjv@Acts:25:14; strkjv@Phillipians:1:2|. {Tychicus} (\Tuchikos\). Mentioned also in strkjv@Ephesians:6:21| as the bearer of that Epistle and with the same verb \gnrisei\ (future active of \gnriz\) and with the same descriptive epithet as here (\ho agaptos adelphos kai pistos diakonos en Kurii\, the beloved brother and faithful minister in the Lord) except that here we have also \kai sundoulos\ (and fellow-servant). Abbott suggests that Paul adds \sundoulos\ because he had used it of Epaphras in strkjv@1:7|. Perhaps \pistos\ goes with both substantives and means faithful to Paul as well as to Christ.
rwp@Colossians:4:14 @{Luke, the beloved physician} (\Loukas ho iatros ho agaptos\). Mentioned also in strkjv@Philemon:1:24; strkjv@2Timothy:4:11|. The author of the Gospel and the Acts. Both Mark and Luke are with Paul at this time, possibly also with copies of their Gospels with them. The article here (repeated) may mean "my beloved physician." It would seem certain that Luke looked after Paul's health and that Paul loved him. Paul was Luke's hero, but it was not a one-sided affection. It is beautiful to see preacher and physician warm friends in the community. {Demas} (\Dmas\). Just his name here (a contraction of Demetrius), but in strkjv@2Timothy:4:10| he is mentioned as one who deserted Paul.
rwp@Ephesians:1:6 @{To the praise} (\eis epainon\). Note the prepositions in this sentence. {Which} (\hs\). Genitive case of the relative \hn\ (cognate accusative with \echaritsen\ (he freely bestowed), late verb \charito\ (from \charis\, grace), in N.T. attracted to case of antecedent \charitos\ only here and strkjv@Luke:1:28|. {In the Beloved} (\en ti gapmeni\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa\. This phrase nowhere else in the N.T. though in the Apostolic Fathers.
rwp@Ephesians:2:4 @{But God} (\ho de theos\). Change in the structure of the sentence here, resuming verse 1| after the break. {Being rich in mercy} (\plousios n en eleei\). More than \elemn\ (being merciful). {Wherewith} (\hn\). Cognate accusative with \gapsen\ (loved).
rwp@Ephesians:5:25 @{Even as Christ also loved the church} (\kaths kai ho Christos gapsen tn ekklsian\). This is the wonderful new point not in strkjv@Colossians:3:19| that lifts this discussion of the husband's love for his wife to the highest plane.
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 @ A PERSONAL WITNESS It is manifest all through the book that the writer is the witness who is making the contribution of his personal knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ during his earthly ministry. In strkjv@John:1:14| he plainly says that "the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory" (\etheasametha tn doxan autou\). He here associates others with him in this witness to the glory of the Word, but in strkjv@John:21:25| he employs the singular "I suppose" (\oimai\) in sharp dis- tinction from the plural "we know" (\oidamen\) just before. The writer is present in nearly all the scenes described. The word witness (\marture, marturia\) so common in this Gospel (John:1:7,8,19; strkjv@3:11,26,33; strkjv@5:31; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@21:24|, etc.) illustrates well this point of view. In the Gospel of Luke we have the work of one who was not a personal witness of Christ (Luke:1:1-4|). In the Gospel of Matthew we possess either the whole work of a personal follower and apostle or at least the Logia of Matthew according to Papias preserved in it. In Mark's Gospel we have as the basis the preaching of Simon Peter as preserved by his interpreter John Mark. John's Gospel claims to be the personal witness of "the disciple whom Jesus loved" and as such deserves and has received exceptional esteem. One may note all through the book evidences of an eye-witness in the vivid details.
rwp@Info_John @ WITH A HOME IN JERUSALEM It is not only that the writer was a Jew who knew accurately places and events in Palestine, once denied though now universally admitted. The Beloved Disciple took the mother of Jesus "to his own home" (\eis ta idia\, strkjv@John:19:27|) from the Cross when Jesus commended his mother to his care. But this Beloved Disciple had access to the palace of the high priest (John:18:15f.|). Delff (_Das vierte Evangelium wiederhergestellt_, 1890) argues that this fact shows that the Beloved Disciple was not one of the twelve apostles, one of a priestly family of wealth in Jerusalem. He does seem to have had special information concerning what took place in the Sanhedrin (John:7:45-52; strkjv@11:47-53; strkjv@12:10ff.|). But at once we are confronted with the difficulty of supposing one outside of the circle of the twelve on even more intimate terms with Jesus than the twelve themselves and who was even present at the last passover meal and reclined on the bosom of Jesus (John:13:23|). Nor is this all, for he was one of the seven disciples by the Sea of Galilee (John:21:1ff.|) when Peter speaks to Jesus about the "Beloved Disciple" (John:21:20|).
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 BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE (SINCE 1880) ABBOT, EZRA, _On the Authorship of the Fourth Gospel_ (1880). ABBOT, PEABODY, and LIGHTFOOT, _The Fourth Gospel_ (1891). ABBOTT, E.A., _Johannine Vocabulary_ (1935).,_Johannine Grammar_ (1906). APPEL, _Die Echtheit des Johannesevangeliums_ (1915). ASKWITH, E.H., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910). BACON, B.W., _The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate_ (1910). BALDENSPERGER, W., _Der Prolog des vierten Evangeliums_ (1898). BARTH, K., _The Gospel of John and the Synoptic Gospels_ (1907). BAUER, W., _Das Johannes-Evangelium_. 2 Aufl. (1925). BELZER, _Das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes_ (1905). BERNARD, J. H., _Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1929), in Int. Crit. Comm. BERT, _Das Evangelium des Johannes_ (1922). BLASS, F., _Evangelium secundum Johannem_ (1902). BROOKE, A. E., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (Cambridge Biblical Essays, pp. 289 to 328. 1909). BURCH, VACHER, _The Structure and Message of St. John's Gospel_ (1928). BURNEY, C. F., _The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922). CALMES, _L'Evangile selon S. Jean_ (1904). CANDLER, W. A., _Practical Studies in the Gospel of John_ (3 vols,, 1912-15). CARPENTER, J. ESTLIN, _The Johannine Writings_ (1927). CHAPMAN, DOM JOHN, _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). CHARNWOOD, LORD, _According to St. John_ (1925). CLEMEN, C., _Die Entstehung des Johannesevangeliums_ (1912). D'ALMA, _Lamentations:Controverse du quatrieme evangile_ (1908).,Philo et le quotrieme evangile_ (1911). DAUSCH' _Das Johannesevangelium_ (1909). DELFF, H., _Das vierte Evangelium wiederhergestellt_ (1890).,Neue Beitrage zur Kritik und Erklarung des vierten Evangeliums (1890). DODS, M., _Expositor's Bible_ (2 vols., 1891).,Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1897). DRUMMOND, JAMES, _An Inquiry into the Character and Author- ship of the Fourth Gospel_ (1904). EVANS, H. H., _St. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel_ (1888). EWALD, P., _Das Hauptproblem der Evangelienfrage und der Weg zu seiner Losung_ (1890). FOUARD, S., _Jean et la hn de l'age apostolique_ (1904). GARDNER, P., _The Ephesian Gospel_ (1915). GARVIE, A. E., _The Beloved Disciple_ (1922). GOBEL, _Die Reden des Herrn nach Johannes_ (2 vols., 1906, 1910). GODET, F., _Comm. on the Gospel of St. John_ (Tr., 2 vols., 1886--90). GOGUEL, M., _Les sources du recit Johannique de la Passion_ (1910).,Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1924). GORDON, S. D., _Quiet Talks on St. John's Gospel_. GORE, C., _Exposition of the Gospel of John_ (1920). GREEN, A. V., _The Ephesian Canonical Writings_ (1910). GREGORY, C. R., _Wellhausen und Johannes_ (1910). GRILL, J., _Untersuchungen uber die Entstehung des vierten Evangeliums_ (1902). GUMBEL, _Das Johannesevangelium Eine Erganzung des Lukas ev_. (1911). HARRIS, J. RENDEL, _The Origin of the Prologue to St. John's Gospel_ (1917). HAYES, D. A., _John and His Writings_ (1917). HOERNLE, E. S., _The Record of the Loved Disciple_ etc. (1913). HOLLAND, H. S., _The Philosophy of Faith and the Fourth Gospel_ (1919).,_The Fourth Gospel_ (1923). HOLTZMANN, H. J., _Evangelium, Briefe, und Offenbarung des Johannes_. 3 Aufl. (1908). HOLTZMANN, _Hand-Comm_. 3 Aufl. von Bauer (1908). HOVEY, A. H., _In American Comm_. (1885). HOWARD, W. F., _The Fourth Gospel in Recent Criticism and Interpretation_ (1931). IVERACH, JAMES, _Gospel of John_ (Int. Stand. Bible Encycl.). JACKSON, H. L., _The Fourth Gospel and Some Recent German Criticism_ (1906).,_The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_ (1918). JOHNSTON, J. S., _The Philosophy of the Fourth Gospel_ (1909). KEISKER, _The Inner Witness of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922). KREYENBUHL, _Neue Losung der Johanneischen Frage_ (1905). LARFIELD, _Die beide Johannes von Ephesus_ (1914). LEATHES, STANLEY, _The Witness of St. John to Christ_. LEPIN, _L'origine du quatrieme evangile_ (1907; 1927).,_Lamentations:valeur historique du quatrieme euangile_ (1910). LEWIS, F. G., _The Irenaeus Testimony to the Fourth Gospel_ (1908). LEWIS, F. G., _Disarrangements in the Fourth Gospel_ (1910). LIGHTFOOT, J. B., _Biblical Essays_ (pages 1-198; I-III, 1893). LLOYD, J. P. D., _The Son of Thunder_ (1932). LOISY, A., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1903). LOWRIE, _The Doctrine of John_ (1899). LYMAN, MARY ELY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Life of Today_ (1931). MANSON, W., _The Incarnate Glory_ (1923). MAURICE, F. D., _The Gospel of St. John_ (1906). McGREGoR, G. H., _The Moffatt Commentary_ (1930). MONTGOMERY, J. A., _The Origin of the Gospel According to St. John_ (1923). MOUSE, _Johannes und Paulus_ (1915). MUIRHEAD, L. A., _The Message of the Fourth Gospel_ (1925). NOLLOTH, C. F., _The Fourth Evangelist_ (1925). NUNN, H. P. V., _The Son of Zebedee and the Fourth Gospel (1927). ORR, JAMES, _The Authenticity of St. John's Gospel Deduced from Internal Evidence_. OVERBECK, _Das Johannesevangelium_ (1911). PLUMMER, A., _Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1913). REVILLE, J., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1901). REYNOLDS, H. R., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D. B., 1899). RICHMOND, W., _The Gospel of the Rejection_ (1906). ROBERTSON, A. T., _The Divinity of Christ in the Gospel of John_ (1916). ROBINSON, A., _The Historical Character of St. John's Gospel_ (1929). ROBINSON, B. W., _The Gospel of John_ (1925). SANDAY, W., _Criticism of the Fourth Gospel_ (1905). SCHLATTER, _Die Sprache und Heimath des vierten Evangelisten_ (1903). SCHMIEDEL, P. W., _The Johannine Writings_ (1908). SCOTT, E. F., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Purpose and Theology_ (1906). SCOTT, E. F., _The Historical and Religious Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1903). SCOTT-MONCRIEFF, C. E., _St. John, Apostle, Evangelist and Prophet_ (1909). SELBIE, W. B., _Belief and Life: Studies in the Thought of the Fourth Gospel_ (1916). SMITH, J. R., _The Teaching of the Fourth Gospel_ (1903). SMITH, P. V., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Historical Importance_ (1926). SPEER, R. E., _The Greatest Book in the World_ (1915). SPITTA, F., _Das Johannesevangelium als Quelle der Geschichte Jesu_ (1910). STANGE, _Die Eigenart des Johanneischen Produktion_ (1914). STANTON, V. H., _The Fourth Gospel_ (Part III of Gospels as Hist. Documents, 1921). STEVENS, G. B., _The Johannine Theology_ (1898). STRACHAN, R. H., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D C G 1906).,The Fourth Gospel: Its Significance and Environ- ment_ (1917).,The Fourth Evangelist: Dramatist or Historian_ (1925). TILLMANN, FRITZ, _Das Johannesevangelium Uebersetzt und Erklart_ (1931). VEDDER, H. C., _The Johannine Writings and the Johannine Problems_ (1917). WARSCHAUER, J., _The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_. WATKINS, W. H., _Modern Criticism Considered in its Rela- tion to the Fourth Gospel_ (1890). WATSON, H. A., _The Mysticism of St. John's Gospel_ (1916). WEARING, _The World View of the Fourth Gospel_ (1918). WEISS, B., _Meyer Komm_. 9 Aufl. (1902).,_Das Johannesevangelium als einheitliches Werk_ (1911). WELLHAUSEN, J., _Das Evangelium Johannis_ (1908). WENDT, H. H., _The Gospel according to St. John: An Inquiry into its Genesis and Historical Value_ (1911).,_Die Schichten im vierten Evangelium_ (1911). WESTCOTT, B. F., _The Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1908). WHITELAW, _The Gospel of John_ (1888). WINDISCH, H., _Johannes und die Synoptiker_ (1927). WORSLEY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Synoptists_ (1911). WREDE, W., _Charakter und Tendenz del Johannesevangelium_ (1903). ZAHN, TH., _Dal Evangelium Johannis (1908). 6 Aufl. (1921). strkjv@John:1:1 @{In the beginning} (\en archi\). \Arch\ is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew _be reshith_ in strkjv@Genesis:1:1|. But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing. {Was} (\n\). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of \eimi\ to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (\egeneto\, became) appears in verse 14| for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in strkjv@8:58| "before Abraham came (\genesthai\) I am" (\eimi\, timeless existence). {The Word} (\ho logos\). \Logos\ is from \leg\, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. \Logos\ is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (\anima mundi\) and Marcus Aurelius used \spermatikos logos\ for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew _memra_ was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in strkjv@Proverbs:8:23|. Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (_The Origin of the _Prologue to St. John_, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John's standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term \Logos\, but not John's conception of personal pre-existence. The term \Logos\ is applied to Christ only in strkjv@John:1:1,14; strkjv@Revelation:19:13; strkjv@1John:1:1| "concerning the Word of life" (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of "the Word of God" in strkjv@Hebrews:4:12|. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f.; strkjv@Colossians:1:17|) and in strkjv@Hebrews:1:2f.| and in strkjv@John:17:5|. This term suits John's purpose better than \sophia\ (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the \aeon\ Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos "became flesh" (\sarx egeneto\, verse 14|) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once. {With God} (\pros ton theon\). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. \Pros\ with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In strkjv@1John:2:1| we have a like use of \pros\: "We have a Paraclete with the Father" (\paraklton echomen pros ton patera\). See \prospon pros prospon\ (face to face, strkjv@1Corinthians:13:12|), a triple use of \pros\. There is a papyrus example of \pros\ in this sense \to gnston ts pros alllous suntheias\, "the knowledge of our intimacy with one another" (M.&M., _Vocabulary_) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, _Origin of Prologue_, p. 8) that the use of \pros\ here and in strkjv@Mark:6:3| is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is _Koin_, not old Attic. In strkjv@John:17:5| John has \para soi\ the more common idiom. {And the Word was God} (\kai theos n ho logos\). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying \ho theos n ho logos\. That would mean that all of God was expressed in \ho logos\ and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (\ho logos\) and the predicate without it (\theos\) just as in strkjv@John:4:24| \pneuma ho theos\ can only mean "God is spirit," not "spirit is God." Songs:in strkjv@1John:4:16| \ho theos agap estin\ can only mean "God is love," not "love is God" as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 767f. Songs:in strkjv@John:1:14| \ho Logos sarx egeneto\, "the Word became flesh," not "the flesh became Word." Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.
rwp@John:1:11 @{Unto his own} (\eis ta idia\). Neuter plural, "unto his own things," the very idiom used in strkjv@19:27| when the Beloved Disciple took the mother of Jesus "to his own home." The world was "the own home" of the Logos who had made it. See also strkjv@16:32; strkjv@Acts:21:6|. {They that were his own} (\hoi idioi\). In the narrower sense, "his intimates," "his own family," "his own friends" as in strkjv@13:1|. Jesus later said that a prophet is not without honour save in his own country (Mark:6:4; strkjv@John:4:44|), and the town of Nazareth where he lived rejected him (Luke:4:28f.; strkjv@Matthew:13:58|). Probably here \hoi idioi\ means the Jewish people, the chosen people to whom Christ was sent first (Matthew:15:24|), but in a wider sense the whole world is included in \hoi idioi\. Conder's _The Hebrew Tragedy_ emphasizes the pathos of the situation that the house of Israel refused to welcome the Messiah when he did come, like a larger and sadder Enoch Arden experience. {Received him not} (\auton ou parelabon\). Second aorist active indicative of \paralamban\, old verb to take to one's side, common verb to welcome, the very verb used by Jesus in strkjv@14:3| of the welcome to his Father's house. Cf. \katelaben\ in verse 5|. Israel slew the Heir (Hebrews:1:2|) when he came, like the wicked husbandmen (Luke:20:14|).
rwp@John:1:15 @{Beareth witness} (\marturei\). Historical (dramatic) present indicative of this characteristic word in John (cf. strkjv@1:17f.|). See strkjv@1:32,34| for historical examples of John's witness to Christ. This sentence is a parenthesis in Westcott and Hort's text, though the Revised Version makes a parenthesis of most of verse 14|. The witness of John is adduced in proof of the glory full of grace and truth already claimed for the Incarnate Logos. {Crieth} (\kekragen\). Second perfect active indicative of \kraz\, old verb for loud crying, repeated in dramatic form again for emphasis recalling the wonderful Voice in the wilderness which the Beloved Disciple can still hear echoing through the years. {This was} (\houtos n\). Imperfect indicative where John throws the tense back in past time when he looked forward to the coming of the Messiah as in strkjv@Acts:3:10| where we should prefer "is" (\estin\). Gildersleeve (_Syntax_, p. 96) calls this the "imperfect of sudden appreciation of the real state of things." {Of whom I said} (\hon eipon\). But B C and a corrector of Aleph (Westcott and Hort) have \ho eipn\ "the one who said," a parenthetical explanation about the Baptist, not the words of the Baptist about Christ. {After me} (\opis mou\). See also strkjv@1:27|. Later in time John means. He described "the Coming One" (\ho erchomenos\) before he saw Jesus. The language of John here is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:3:11| \ho opis mou erchomenos\ (cf. strkjv@Mark:1:7|). The Beloved Disciple had heard the Baptist say these very words, but he also had the Synoptic Gospels. {Is become} (\gegonen\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. It is already an actual fact when the Baptist is speaking. {Before me} (\emprosthen mou\). In rank and dignity, the Baptist means, \ho ischuroteros mou\ "the one mightier than I" (Mark:1:7|) and \ischuroteros mou\ "mightier than I" (Matthew:3:11|). In strkjv@John:3:28| \emprosthen ekeinou\ (before him, the Christ) does mean priority in time, but not here. This superior dignity of the Messiah John proudly recognizes always (John:3:25-30|). {For he was before me} (\hoti prtos mou n\). Paradox, but clear. He had always been (\n imperfect\) before John in his Pre-incarnate state, but "after" John in time of the Incarnation, but always ahead of John in rank immediately on his Incarnation. \Prtos mou\ (superlative with ablative) occurs here when only two are compared as is common in the vernacular _Koin_. Songs:the Beloved Disciple came first (\prtos\) to the tomb, ahead of Peter (20:4|). Songs:also \prton humn\ in strkjv@15:18| means "before you" as if it were \proteron humn\. Verse 30| repeats these words almost exactly.
rwp@John:1:34 @{I have seen} (\heraka\). Present perfect active of \hora\. John repeats the statement of verse 32| (\tetheamai\). {Have borne witness} (\memarturka\). Perfect active indicative of \marture\ for which verb see 32|. {This is the Son of God} (\ho huios tou theou\). The Baptist saw the Spirit come on Jesus at his baptism and undoubtedly heard the Father's voice hail him as "My Beloved Son" (Mark:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:3:17; strkjv@Luke:3:22|). Nathanael uses it as a Messianic title (John:1:49|) as does Martha (11:27|). The Synoptics use it also of Christ (Mark:3:11; strkjv@Matthew:14:33; strkjv@Luke:22:70|). Caiaphas employs it to Christ as a Messianic title (Matthew:26:63|) and Jesus confessed under oath that he was (verse strkjv@Matthew:26:64|), thus applying the term to himself as he does in John's Gospel (5:25; strkjv@10:36; strkjv@11:4|) and by implication (the Father, the Son) in strkjv@Matthew:11:27| (Luke:10:22|). Hence in the Synoptics also Jesus calls himself the Son of God. The phrase means more than just Messiah and expresses the peculiar relation of the Son to the Father (John:3:18; strkjv@5:25; strkjv@17:5; strkjv@19:7; strkjv@20:31|) like that of the Logos with God in strkjv@1:1|.
rwp@John:1:35 @{Again on the morrow} (\ti epaurion palin\). Third day since verse 19|. {Was standing} (\histkei\). Past perfect of \histmi\, intransitive, and used as imperfect in sense. See same form in strkjv@7:37|. {Two} (\duo\). One was Andrew (verse 40|), the other the Beloved Disciple (the Apostle John), who records this incident with happy memories.
rwp@John:3:16 @{For so} (\houts gar\). This use of \gar\ is quite in John's style in introducing his comments (2:25; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@5:13|, etc.). This "Little Gospel" as it is often called, this "comfortable word" (the Anglican Liturgy), while not a quotation from Jesus is a just and marvellous interpretation of the mission and message of our Lord. In verses 16-21| John recapitulates in summary fashion the teaching of Jesus to Nicodemus. {Loved} (\gapsen\). First aorist active indicative of \agapa\, the noble word so common in the Gospels for the highest form of love, used here as often in John (14:23; strkjv@17:23; strkjv@1John:3:1; strkjv@4:10|) of God's love for man (cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:16; strkjv@Romans:5:8; strkjv@Ephesians:2:4|). In strkjv@21:15| John presents a distinction between \agapa\ and \phile\. \Agapa\ is used also for love of men for men (13:34|), for Jesus (8:42|), for God (1John:4:10|). {The world} (\ton kosmon\). The whole cosmos of men, including Gentiles, the whole human race. This universal aspect of God's love appears also in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19; strkjv@Romans:5:8|. {That he gave} (\hste edken\). The usual classical construction with \hste\ and the indicative (first aorist active) practical result, the only example in the N.T. save that in strkjv@Galatians:2:13|. Elsewhere \hste\ with the infinitive occurs for actual result (Matthew:13:32|) as well as purpose (Matthew:10:1|), though even this is rare. {His only begotten Son} (\ton huion ton monogen\). "The Son the only begotten." For this word see on ¯1:14,18; strkjv@3:18|. The rest of the sentence, the purpose clause with \hina-echi\ precisely reproduces the close of strkjv@3:15| save that \eis auton\ takes the place of \en auti\ (see strkjv@1:12|) and goes certainly with \pisteun\ (not with \echi\ as \en auti\ in verse 15|) and the added clause "should not perish but" (\m apoltai alla\, second aorist middle subjunctive, intransitive, of \apollumi\, to destroy). The same contrast between "perish" and "eternal life" (for this world and the next) appears also in strkjv@10:28|. On "perish" see also strkjv@17:12|.
rwp@John:3:19 @{And this is the judgment} (\haut de estin h krisis\). A thoroughly Johannine phrase for sequence of thought (15:12; strkjv@17:3; strkjv@1John:1:5; strkjv@5:11,14; strkjv@3John:1:6|). It is more precisely the process of judging (\kri-sis\) rather than the result (\kri-ma\) of the judgment. "It is no arbitrary sentence, but the working out of a moral law" (Bernard). {The light is come} (\to phs elluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\, a permanent result as already explained in the Prologue concerning the Incarnation (1:4,5,9,11|). Jesus is the Light of the world. {Loved darkness} (\gapsan to skotos\). Job:(Job:24:13|) spoke of men rebelling against the light. Here \to skotos\, common word for moral and spiritual darkness (1Thessalonians:5:5|), though \h skotia\ in strkjv@John:1:5|. "Darkness" is common in John as a metaphor for the state of sinners (8:12; strkjv@12:35, 46; strkjv@1John:1:6; strkjv@2:8,9,11|). Jesus himself is the only moral and spiritual light of the world (8:12|) as he dared claim to his enemies. The pathos of it all is that men fall in love with the darkness of sin and rebel against the light like denizens of the underworld, "for their works were evil (\ponra\)." When the light appears, they scatter to their holes and dens. \Ponros\ (from \ponos\, toil, \pone\, to toil) is used of the deeds of the world by Jesus (7:7|). In the end the god of this world blinds men's eyes so that they do not see the light (2Corinthians:4:4|). The fish in the Mammoth Cave have no longer eyes, but only sockets where eyes used to be. The evil one has a powerful grip on the world (1John:5:19|).
rwp@John:5:40 @{And ye will not come to me} (\kai ou thelete elthein pros me\). "And yet" (\kai\) as often in John. "This is the tragedy of the rejection of Messiah by the Messianic race" (Bernard). See strkjv@John:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:23:37| (\kai ouk thelsate\, and ye would not). Men loved darkness rather than light (John:3:19|). {That ye may have life} (\hina zn echte\). Life in its simplest form as in strkjv@3:36| (cf. strkjv@3:16|). This is the purpose of John in writing the Fourth Gospel (20:31|). There is life only in Christ Jesus.
rwp@John:9:2 @{Who did sin?} (\tis hmarten;\). Second aorist active indicative of \hamartan\. See strkjv@Acts:3:2; strkjv@14:8| for two examples of lameness from birth. Blindness is common in the Orient and Jesus healed many cases (cf. strkjv@Mark:8:23; strkjv@10:46|) and mentions this fact as one of the marks of the Messiah in the message to the Baptist (Matthew:11:5|). This is the only example of congenital blindness healed. It is not clear that the disciples expected Jesus to heal this case. They are puzzled by the Jewish notion that sickness was a penalty for sin. The Book of Job:had shown that this was not always the case and Jesus shows it also (Luke:13:1-5|). If this man was guilty, it was due to prenatal sin on his part, a curious notion surely. The other alternative charged it upon his parents. That is sometimes true (Exodus:20:5|, etc.), but by no means always. The rabbinical casuists loved to split hairs on this problem. Ezekiel (Ezekiel:18:20|) says: "The soul that sinneth it shall die" (individual responsibility for sin committed). There is something in heredity, but not everything. {That he should be born blind} (\hina tuphlos gennthi\). Probably consecutive (or sub-final) use of \hina\ with first aorist passive subjunctive of \genna\.
rwp@John:21:24 @{That is} (\houtos estin\). The one just mentioned in verse 20|, "the disciple whom Jesus loved." {And wrote these things} (\kai ho grapsas tauta\). Here there is a definite statement that the Beloved Disciple wrote this book. {We know} (\oidamen\). The plural here seems intentional as the identification and endorsement of a group of disciples who know the author and wish to vouch for his identity and for the truthfulness of his witness. Probably we see here a verse added by a group of elders in Ephesus where John had long laboured.
rwp@Info_Jude:@ SPECIAL BOOKS ON JUDE (Apart from those on II Peter or the Catholic Epistles) Chase, F. H., _Jude:in Hastings D B_ (1899). Ermoni, V., _L'epitre de Jude_ (1903, in Vigoroux, Diction- naire de la Bible). Georchin, B., _Der Brief Judas_ (1901). Kasteren, J. P., _Deuteronomy:brief uan den apostel Judas_ (1916). Maier, F., _Der Judasbrief_ (1906). Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of Jude_ (in Expositor's Greek Testament, 1910). Plummer, A., _St. James and St. Jude_ (Expositor's Bible). Rampf, M. F., _Der Brief Juda_ (1854). Stier, R., _Der Brief Judas, des Bruders des Herrn_ (1850). Wandel, G., _Der Brief des Judas_ (1898). strkjv@Jude:1:1 @{Servant} (\doulos\). Precisely as James (James:1:1|), only James added \kuriou\ (Lord). {Brother of James} (\adelphos Iakbou\). Thus Jude:identifies himself. But not the "Judas of James" (Luke:6:16; strkjv@Acts:1:13|). {To them that are called} (\tois--kltois\). But this translation (treating \kltois\ as a substantive like strkjv@Romans:1:6; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:24|) is by no means certain as two participles come in between \tois\ and \kltois\. \Kltois\ may be in the predicate position (being called), not attributive. But see strkjv@1Peter:1:1|. {Beloved in God the Father} (\en thei patri gapmenois\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa\, but no precise parallel to this use of \en\ with \agapa\. {Kept for Jesus Christ} (\Isou Christi tetrmenois\). Perfect passive participle again with dative, unless it is the instrumental, "kept by Jesus Christ," a quite possible interpretation.
rwp@Jude:1:3 @{Beloved} (\agaptoi\). As in strkjv@3John:1:2|. {All diligence} (\psan spoudn\). As in strkjv@2Peter:1:5|. {Of our common salvation} (\peri ts koins hmn strias\). See this use of \koinos\ (common to all) in strkjv@Titus:1:4| with \pistis\, while in strkjv@2Peter:1:1| we have \isotimon pistin\, which see. {I was constrained} (\anagkn eschon\). "I had necessity" like strkjv@Luke:14:18; strkjv@Hebrews:7:27|. {To contend earnestly} (\epagnizesthai\). Late and rare (in Plutarch, inscriptions) compound, here only in N.T. A little additional (\epi\) striving to the already strong \agnizesthai\ (\agn\ contest). Cf. strkjv@1Timothy:6:12| \agnizou ton kalon agna\. {For the faith} (\ti--pistei\). Dative of advantage. Here not in the original sense of trust, but rather of the thing believed as in verse 20; strkjv@Galatians:1:23; strkjv@3:23; strkjv@Phillipians:1:27|. {Once for all delivered} (\hapax paradotheisi\). First aorist passive participle feminine dative singular of \paradidmi\, for which see strkjv@2Peter:2:21|. See also strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:15; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:2; strkjv@1Timothy:6:20|.
rwp@Info_Luke @ THIS COMPANION OF PAUL A PHYSICIAN The argument for this position lies in the use of medical terms throughout the Gospel and the Acts. Hobart in his _Medical Language of St. Luke_ proves that the author of both Gospel and Acts shows a fondness for medical terms best explained by the fact that he was a physician. Like most enthusiasts he overdid it and some of his proof does not stand the actual test of sifting. Harnack and Hawkins in his _Horae Synopticae_ have picked out the most pertinent items which will stand. Cadbury in his _Style and Literary Method of Luke_ denies that Luke uses Greek medical words more frequently in proportion than Josephus, Philo, Plutarch, or Lucian. It is to miss the point about Luke merely to count words. It is mainly the interest in medical things shown in Luke and Acts. The proof that Luke is the author of the books does not turn on this fact. It is merely confirmatory. Paul calls Luke "the beloved physician" (\ho iatros ho agaptos\, strkjv@Colossians:4:14|), "my beloved physician." Together they worked in the Island of Malta (Acts:28:8-10|) where many were healed and Luke shared with Paul in the appreciation of the natives who "came and were healed (\etherapeuonto\) who also honoured us with many honours." The implication there is that Paul wrought miracles of healing (\iasato\), while Luke practised his medical art also. Other notes of the physician's interest will be indicated in the discussion of details like his omitting Mark's apparent discredit of physicians (Mark:5:26|) by a milder and more general statement of a chronic case (Luke:8:43|).
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:7:33 @{John the Baptist is come} (\elluthen\). Second perfect active indicative where strkjv@Matthew:11:18| has \lthen\ second aorist active indicative. Songs:as to verse 34|. Luke alone has "bread" and "wine." Otherwise these verses like strkjv@Matthew:11:18,19|, which see for discussion of details. There are actually critics today who say that Jesus was called the friend of sinners and even of harlots because he loved them and their ways and so deserved the slur cast upon him by his enemies. If men can say that today we need not wonder that the Pharisees and lawyers said it then to justify their own rejection of Jesus.
rwp@Luke:7:47 @{Are forgiven} (\aphentai\). Doric perfect passive form. See strkjv@Luke:5:21,23|. {For she loved much} (\hoti gapsen polu\). Illustration or proof, not reason for the forgiveness. Her sins had been already forgiven and remained forgiven. {But to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little} (\Hi de oligon aphietai oligon agapi\). This explanation proves that the meaning of \hoti\ preceding is proof, not cause.
rwp@Luke:9:35 @If \ekeinous\ be accepted here instead of \autous\, the three disciples would be outside of the cloud. {Out of the cloud} (\ek ts nephels\). This voice was the voice of the Father like that at the baptism of Jesus (Luke:3:22; strkjv@Mark:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:3:17|) and like that near the end (John:12:28-30|) when the people thought it was a clap of thunder or an angel. {My son, my chosen} (\Hosea:huios mou, ho eklelegmenos\). Songs:the best documents (Aleph B L Syriac Sinaitic). The others make it "My Beloved" as in strkjv@Mark:9:7; strkjv@Matthew:17:5|. These disciples are commanded to hear Jesus, God's Son, even when he predicts his death, a pointed rebuke to Simon Peter as to all.
rwp@Luke:9:49 @{And John answered} (\apokritheis de Ians\). As if John wanted to change the subject after the embarrassment of the rebuke for their dispute concerning greatness (Luke:9:46-48|). {Master} (\epistata\). Only in Luke in the N.T. as already four times (5:5; strkjv@8:24,45; strkjv@9:33|). {We forbade him} (\ekluomen auton\). Conative imperfect as in strkjv@Mark:9:38|, We tried to hinder him. {Because he followeth not with us} (\hoti ouk akolouthei meth hmn\). Present tense preserved for vividness where Mark has imperfect {kolouthei}. Note also here "with us" (\meth' hmn\) where Mark has associative instrumental \hmin\. It is a pitiful specimen of partisan narrowness and pride even in the Beloved Disciple, one of the Sons of Thunder. The man was doing the Master's work in the Master's name and with the Master's power, but did not run with the group of the Twelve.
rwp@Luke:10:27 @{And he answering} (\ho de apokritheis\). First aorist participle, no longer passive in idea. The lawyer's answer is first from the _Shema_ (Deuteronomy:6:3; strkjv@11:13|) which was written on the phylacteries. The second part is from strkjv@Leviticus:19:18| and shows that the lawyer knew the law. At a later time Jesus himself in the temple gives a like summary of the law to a lawyer (Mark:12:28-34; strkjv@Matthew:22:34-40|) who wanted to catch Jesus by his question. There is no difficulty in the two incidents. God is to be loved with all of man's four powers (heart, soul, strength, mind) here as in strkjv@Mark:12:30|.
rwp@Luke:10:39 @{Which also sat} (\h kai parakathestheisa\). First aorist passive participle of \parakathezomai\, an old verb, but only here in the N.T. It means to sit beside (\para\) and \pros\ means right in front of the feet of Jesus. It is not clear what the point is in \kai\ here. It may mean that Martha loved to sit here also as well as Mary. {Heard} (\kouen\). Imperfect active. She took her seat by the feet of Jesus and went on listening to his talk.
rwp@Luke:15:3 @{This parable} (\tn paraboln tautn\). The Parable of the Lost Sheep (15:3-7|). This is Christ's way of answering the cavilling of these chronic complainers. Jesus gave this same parable for another purpose in another connection (Matthew:18:12-14|). The figure of the Good Shepherd appears also in strkjv@John:10:1-18|. "No simile has taken more hold upon the mind of Christendom" (Plummer). Jesus champions the lost and accepts the challenge and justifies his conduct by these superb stories. "The three Episodes form a climax: The Pasture--the House--the Home; the Herdsman--the Housewife--the Father; the Sheep--the Treasure--the Beloved Son" (Ragg).
rwp@Luke:16:22 @{Was borne} (\apenechthnai\). First aorist passive infinitive from \apopher\, a common compound defective verb. The accusative case of general reference (\auton\) is common with the infinitive in such clauses after \egeneto\, like indirect discourse. It is his soul, of course, that was so borne by the angels, not his body. {Into Abraham's bosom} (\eis ton holpon Abraam\). To be in Abraham's bosom is to the Jew to be in Paradise. In strkjv@John:1:18| the Logos is in the bosom of the Father. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are in heaven and welcome those who come (Matthew:8:11|; 4Macc. strkjv@14:17). The beloved disciple reclined on the bosom of Jesus at the last passover (John:13:23|) and this fact indicates special favour. Songs:the welcome to Lazarus was unusual. {Was buried} (\etaph\). Second aorist (effective) passive of the common verb \thapt\. Apparently in contrast with the angelic visitation to the beggar.
rwp@Mark:1:33 @{At the door} (\pros tn thuran\). At the door of Peter's house. The whole city was gathered together there (n episungmen, past perfect passive periphrastic indicative, double compound \epi\ and \sun\). Mark alone mentions this vivid detail. He is seeing with Peter's eyes again. Peter no doubt watched the beautiful scene with pride and gratitude as Jesus stood in the door and healed the great crowds in the glory of that sunset. He loved to tell it afterwards. {Divers diseases} (\poikilais nosois\). See strkjv@Matthew:4:24| about \poikilos\ meaning many-coloured, variegated. All sorts of sick folk came and were healed.
rwp@Mark:2:13 @{By the seaside} (\para tn thalassan\). A pretty picture of Jesus walking by the sea and a walk that Jesus loved (Mark:1:16; strkjv@Matthew:4:18|). Probably Jesus went out from the crowd in Peter's house as soon as he could. It was a joy to get a whiff of fresh air by the sea. But it was not long till all the crowd began to come to Jesus (\rcheto\, imperfect) and Jesus was teaching them (\edidasken\, imperfect). It was the old story over again, but Jesus did not run away.
rwp@Mark:6:44 @{Men} (\andres\). Men as different from women as in strkjv@Matthew:14:21|. This remarkable miracle is recorded by all Four Gospels, a nature miracle that only God can work. No talk about accelerating natural processes will explain this miracle. And three eyewitnesses report it: the Logia of Matthew, the eyes of Peter in Mark, the witness of John the Beloved Disciple (Gould). The evidence is overwhelming.
rwp@Mark:7:28 @{Even the dogs under the table} (\kai ta kunaria hupokat ts trapezs\). A delightful picture. Even the little dogs (\kunaria\) under the table {eat of the children's crumbs} (\esthiousin apo tn psichin tn paidin\). Little dogs, little scraps of bread (\psichion\, diminutive of \psichos\, _morsel_), little children (\paidia\, diminutive of \pais\). Probably the little children purposely dropped a few little crumbs for the little dogs. These household dogs, pets of and loved by the children. _Braid Scots_ has it: "Yet the wee dowgs aneath the table eat o' the moole o' the bairns." "A unique combination of faith and wit" (Gould). Instead of resenting Christ's words about giving the children's bread to the dogs (Gentiles) in verse 27|, she instantly turned it to the advantage of her plea for her little daughter.
rwp@Mark:10:21 @{Looking upon him loved him} (\emblepsas auti gapsen\). Mark alone mentions this glance of affection, ingressive aorist participle and verb. Jesus fell in love with this charming youth. {One thing thou lackest} (\Hen se husterei\). strkjv@Luke:18:22| has it: "One thing thou lackest yet" (\Eti hen soi leipei\). Possibly two translations of the same Aramaic phrase. strkjv@Matthew:19:20| represents the youth as asking "What lack I yet?" (\Ti eti huster;\). The answer of Jesus meets that inquiry after more than mere outward obedience to laws and regulations. The verb \huster\ is from the adjective \husteros\ (behind) and means to be too late, to come short, to fail of, to lack. It is used either with the accusative, as here, or with the ablative as in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:5|, or the dative as in Textus Receptus here, \soi\.
rwp@Mark:12:6 @{A beloved son} (\huion agapton\). strkjv@Luke:20:13| has \ton huion ton agapton\. Jesus evidently has in mind the language of the Father to him at his baptism (Mark:1:11; strkjv@Matthew:3:17; strkjv@Luke:3:22|). {Last} (\eschaton\). Only in Mark. See on ¯Matthew:21:37| for discussion of "reverence."
rwp@Mark:14:54 @{Peter had followed him afar off} (\Hosea:Petros apo makrothen kolouthsen auti\). Here Mark uses the constative aorist (\kolouthsen\) where strkjv@Matthew:26:58|, and strkjv@Luke:22:54| have the picturesque imperfect (\kolouthei\), was following. Possibly Mark did not care to dwell on the picture of Peter furtively following at a distance, not bold enough to take an open stand with Christ as the Beloved Disciple did, and yet unable to remain away with the other disciples. {Was sitting with} (\n sunkathmenos\). Periphrastic imperfect middle, picturing Peter making himself at home with the officers (\hupretn\), under rowers, literally, then servants of any kind. strkjv@John:18:25| describes Peter as standing (\hests\). Probably he did now one, now the other, in his restless weary mood. {Warming himself in the light} (\thermainomenos prs to phs\). Direct middle. Fire has light as well as heat and it shone in Peter's face. He was not hidden as much as he supposed he was.
rwp@Matthew:1:19 @{A Righteous Man} (\dikaios\). Or just, not benignant or merciful. The same adjective is used of Zacharias and Elizabeth (Luke:1:6|) and Simeon (Luke:2:25|). "An upright man," the _Braid Scots_ has it. He had the Jewish conscientiousness for the observance of the law which would have been death by stoning (Deuteronomy:22:23|). Though Joseph was upright, he would not do that. "As a good Jew he would have shown his zeal if he had branded her with public disgrace" (McNeile). {And yet not willing} (\kai m theln\). Songs:we must understand \kai\ here, "and yet." Matthew makes a distinction here between "willing" (\theln\) and "wishing" (\eboulth\), that between purpose (\thel\) and desire (\boulomai\) a distinction not always drawn, though present here. It was not his purpose to "make her a public example" (\deigmatisai\), from the root (\deiknumi\ to show), a rare word (Colossians:2:15|). The Latin Vulgate has it _traducere_, the Old Latin _divulgare_, Wycliff _pupplische_ (publish), Tyndale _defame_, Moffatt _disgrace_, Braid Scots "Be i the mooth o' the public." The substantive (\deigmatismos\) occurs on the Rosetta Stone in the sense of "verification." There are a few instances of the verb in the papyri though the meaning is not clear (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). The compound form appears (\paradeigmatiz\) in strkjv@Hebrews:6:6| and there are earlier instances of this compound than of the uncompounded, curiously enough. But new examples of the simple verb, like the substantive, may yet be found. The papyri examples mean to furnish a sample (P Tebt. 5.75), to make trial of (P Ryl. I. 28.32). The substantive means exposure in (P Ryl. I. 28.70). At any rate it is clear that Joseph "was minded to put her away privily." He could give her a bill of divorcement (\apolusai\), the \gt\ laid down in the Mishna, without a public trial. He had to give her the writ (\gt\) and pay the fine (Deuteronomy:24:1|). Songs:he proposed to do this privately (\lathrai\) to avoid all the scandal possible. One is obliged to respect and sympathize with the motives of Joseph for he evidently loved Mary and was appalled to find her untrue to him as he supposed. It is impossible to think of Joseph as the actual father of Jesus according to the narrative of Matthew without saying that Matthew has tried by legend to cover up the illegitimate birth of Jesus. The Talmud openly charges this sin against Mary. Joseph had "a short but tragic struggle between his legal conscience and his love" (McNeile).
rwp@Matthew:3:17 @{A voice out of the heavens} (\phn ek tn ourann\). This was the voice of the Father to the Son whom he identifies as His Son, "my beloved Son." Thus each person of the Trinity is represented (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) at this formal entrance of Jesus upon his Messianic ministry. John heard the voice, of course, and saw the dove. It was a momentous occasion for John and for Jesus and for the whole world. The words are similar to strkjv@Psalms:2:7| and the voice at the Transfiguration (Matthew:17:5|). The good pleasure of the Father is expressed by the timeless aorist (\eudoksa\).
rwp@Matthew:4:3 @{If thou art the Son of God} (\ei huios ei tou theou\). More exactly, "If thou art Son of God," for there is no article with "Son." The devil is alluding to the words of the Father to Jesus at the baptism: "This is my Son the Beloved." He challenges this address by a condition of the first class which assumes the condition to be true and deftly calls on Jesus to exercise his power as Son of God to appease his hunger and thus prove to himself and all that he really is what the Father called him. {Become bread} (\artoi genntai\). Literally, "that these stones (round smooth stones which possibly the devil pointed to or even picked up and held) become loaves" (each stone a loaf). It was all so simple, obvious, easy. It would satisfy the hunger of Christ and was quite within his power. {It is written} (\gegraptai\). Perfect passive indicative, stands written and is still in force. Each time Jesus quotes Deuteronomy to repel the subtle temptation of the devil. Here it is strkjv@Deuteronomy:8:3| from the Septuagint. Bread is a mere detail (Bruce) in man's dependence upon God.
rwp@Matthew:12:18 @{My beloved} (\ho agaptos mou\). This phrase reminds one of strkjv@Matthew:3:17| (the Father's words at Christ's baptism).
rwp@Matthew:12:49 @{Behold my mother and my brothers} (\idou h mtr mou kai hoi adelphoi mou\). A dramatic wave of the hand towards his disciples (learners) accompanied these words. Jesus loved his mother and brothers, but they were not to interfere in his Messianic work. The real spiritual family of Jesus included all who follow him. But it was hard for Mary to go back to Nazareth and leave Jesus with the excited throng so great that he was not even stopping to eat (Mark:3:20|).
rwp@Matthew:26:6 @{In the house of Simon the leper} (\en oikii Simnos tou leprou\). Evidently a man who had been healed of his leprosy by Jesus who gave the feast in honour of Jesus. All sorts of fantastic theories have arisen about it. Some even identify this Simon with the one in strkjv@Luke:7:36ff.|, but Simon was a very common name and the details are very different. Some hold that it was Martha's house because she served (John:12:2|) and that Simon was either the father or husband of Martha, but Martha loved to serve and that proves nothing. Some identify Mary of Bethany with the sinful woman in strkjv@Luke:7| and even with Mary Magdalene, both gratuitous and groundless propositions. For the proof that Mary of Bethany, Mary Magdalene, and the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7| are all distinct see my _Some Minor Characters in the New Testament_. John (John:12:1|) apparently locates the feast six days before the passover, while Mark (Mark:14:3|) and Matthew (26:6|) seem to place it on the Tuesday evening (Jewish Wednesday) just two days before the passover meal. It is possible that John anticipates the date and notes the feast at Bethany at this time because he does not refer to Bethany again. If not, the order of Mark must be followed. According to the order of Mark and Matthew, this feast took place at the very time that the Sanhedrin was plotting about the death of Jesus (Mark:14:1f.|).
rwp@Matthew:26:58 @{To see the end} (\idein to telos\). Peter rallied from the panic and followed afar off (\makrothen\), "more courageous than the rest and yet not courageous enough" (Bruce). John the Beloved Disciple went on into the room where Jesus was. The rest remained outside, but Peter "sat with the officers" to see and hear and hoping to escape notice.
rwp@Matthew:26:69 @{Thou also} (\kai su\). Peter had gone within (\es\) the palace (26:58|), but was sitting {without} (\ex\) the hall where the trial was going on in the open central court with the servants or officers (\hupretn\, under rowers, literally, strkjv@26:58|) of the Sanhedrin. But he could possibly see through the open door above what was going on inside. It is not plain at what stage of the Jewish trial the denials of Peter took place nor the precise order in which they came as the Gospels give them variously. This maid (\paidisk\, slave girl) stepped up to Peter as he was sitting in the court and pointedly said: "Thou also wast with Jesus the Galilean." Peter was warming himself by the fire and the light shone in his face. She probably had noticed Peter come in with John the Beloved Disciple who went on up into the hall of trial. Or she may have seen Peter with Jesus on the streets of Jerusalem.
rwp@Matthew:27:55 @{Many women} (\gunaikes pollai\). We have come to expect the women from Galilee to be faithful, last at the Cross and first at the tomb. Luke (Luke:23:49|) says that "all his acquaintance" (\pantes hoi gnstoi auti\) stood at a distance and saw the end. One may hope that the apostles were in that sad group. But certainly many women were there. The Mother of Jesus had been taken away from the side of the Cross by the Beloved Disciple to his own home (John:19:27|). Matthew names three of the group by name. Mary Magdalene is mentioned as a well-known person though not previously named in Matthew's Gospel. Certainly she is not the sinful woman of strkjv@Luke:7| nor Mary of Bethany. There is another Mary, the mother of James and Joseph (Joses) not otherwise known to us. And then there is the mother of the sons of Zebedee (James and John), usually identified with Salome (Mark:15:40|). These noble and faithful women were "beholding from afar" (\apo makrothen therousai\). These three women may have drawn nearer to the Cross for Mary the Mother of Jesus stood beside the Cross (\para ti stauri\) with Mary of Clopas and Mary Magdalene (John:19:25|) before she left. They had once ministered unto Jesus (\diakonousai auti\) and now he is dead. Matthew does not try to picture the anguish of heart of these noble women nor does he say as Luke (Luke:23:48|) does that "they returned smiting their breasts." He drops the curtain on that saddest of all tragedies as the loyal band stood and looked at the dead Christ on Golgotha. What hope did life now hold for them?
rwp@Matthew:28:7 @{He goeth before you into Galilee} (\proagei humas eis tn Galilaian\). Jesus did appear to the disciples in Galilee on two notable occasions (by the beloved lake, strkjv@John:21|, and on the mountain, strkjv@Matthew:28:16-20|). Probably before the women were permitted to tell this story in full to the disciples who scouted as idle talk (John:24:11|) their first accounts, Jesus appeared to various disciples in Jerusalem on this first great Sunday. Jesus did not say that he would not see any of them in Jerusalem. He merely made a definite appointment in Galilee which he kept.
rwp@Info_Philemon @ THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON FROM ROME A.D. 63 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION This little letter was sent to Philemon by Onesimus, a converted runaway slave of Philemon, along with Tychicus who is going to Colossae with Onesimus (Colossians:4:7-9|) as the bearer also of the so-called Epistle to the Ephesians (Ephesians:6:21f.|). Hence it is clear that these three Epistles were carried to the Province of Asia at the same time. Colossians was probably written before Ephesians which appears to be a general treatment of the same theme. Whether Philemon was actually penned before the other two there is no way of knowing. But it is put first here as standing apart. Probably Paul wrote it himself without dictation because in verse 19| it constitutes a note in his own hand to Philemon for what Onesimus may owe him. Paul applies the spirit of Christianity to the problem of slavery in words that have ultimately set the slaves free from bondage to men. strkjv@Philemon:1:1 @{A prisoner of Christ Jesus} (\desmios Christou Isou\). As verse 9| and in strkjv@Ephesians:3:1; strkjv@4:1|. Old adjective from \desmos\ (bond, \de\, to bind). Apparently used here on purpose rather than \apostolos\ as more effective with Philemon and a more touching occasion of pride as Paul writes with his manacled right hand. {Timothy} (\Timotheos\). With Paul in Ephesus (Acts:19:22|) and probably known to Philemon. Associated with Paul also in I and II Thess., II Cor., Philipp., Col. {To Philemon} (\Philmoni\). A resident of Colossae and a convert of Paul's (verse 19|), perhaps coming to Ephesus while Paul was there when his ministry had so much influence over the province of Asia (Acts:19:9f., 26; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:19|). The name Philemon occurs in the legend of Baucis and Philemon (Ovid's _Metamorphoses_), but with no connection with the brother here. He was active in the church in Colossae ("our co-worker," \sunergi hmn\) and was beloved (\agapti\) by Paul.
rwp@Philemon:1:16 @{No longer as a servant} (\ouketi hs doulon\). "No longer as a slave." Songs:it has to be here. Songs:it should be always. Paul sends Onesimus, the converted runaway slave, back to his legal master, but shows that he expects Philemon the Christian to treat Onesimus as a brother in Christ, not as a slave. {But more than a servant} (\all' huper doulon\). "But beyond a slave." {A brother beloved} (\adelphon agapton\). A brother in Christ. {How much rather to thee} (\posi de mllon soi\). "By how much more to thee," because of Philemon's legal ownership of this now Christian slave. "In the flesh Philemon had the brother for a slave; in the Lord he had the slave for a brother" (Meyer).
rwp@Revelation:3:9 @{I give} (\did\). Late omega form for \didmi\, but the \-mi\ form in strkjv@17:13| (\didoasin\). These Jewish converts are a gift from Christ. For this use of \didmi\ see strkjv@Acts:2:27; strkjv@10:40; strkjv@14:3|. There is ellipse of \tinas\ before \ek\ as in strkjv@2:10| (\ex humn\) and see strkjv@2:9| for "the synagogue of Satan." {Of them which say} (\tn legontn\). Ablative plural in apposition with \sunaggs\. On the construction of \heautous Ioudaious einai\ see on ¯2:9| (\Ioudaious einai heautous\, the order of words being immaterial). {But do lie} (\alla pseudontai\). Present middle indicative of \pseudomai\, explanatory positive, addition here to \kai ouk eisin\ of strkjv@2:9|, in contrast also with \ho althinos\ of verse 7| and in Johannine style (John:8:44; strkjv@1John:1:10; strkjv@2:4|). {I will make them} (\pois autous\). Future active indicative of \poie\, resuming the prophecy after the parenthesis (\tn--pseudontai\, which say--but do lie). {To come and worship} (\hina hxousin kai proskunsousin\). "That they come and worship" (final clause, like _facio ut_ in Latin, with \hina\ and the future active of \hk\ and \proskune\). The language is based on strkjv@Isaiah:45:14; strkjv@60:14|. The Jews expected homage (not worship in the strict sense) from the Gentiles, but it will come to the Christians at last (1Corinthians:14:24|). Later Ignatius (_Philad_. 6) warns this church against Judaizing Christians, perhaps one result of an influx of Jews. {And to know} (\kai gnsin\). Continuation of the purpose clause with \hina\, but with the second aorist active subjunctive rather than the less usual future indicative. See both constructions also with \hina\ in strkjv@22:14|. Probably a reminiscence of strkjv@Isaiah:43:4| in \eg gapsa se\ (I loved thee), first aorist active indicative.
rwp@Revelation:12:11 @{They overcame him} (\autoi eniksan\). First aorist active indicative of \nika\, the verb used by Jesus of his own victory (John:16:33|) and about him (Revelation:3:21; strkjv@5:5|). "The victory of the martyrs marks the failure of Satan's endeavours" (Swete). {Because of the blood of the Lamb} (\dia to haima tou arniou\). As in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:6,9; strkjv@7:14|. The blood of Christ is here presented by \dia\ as the ground for the victory and not the means, as by \en\ in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:9|. Both ideas are true, but \dia\ with the accusative gives only the reason. The blood of Christ does cleanse us from sin (John:1:29; strkjv@1John:1:7|). Christ conquered Satan, and so makes our victory possible (Luke:11:21f.; strkjv@Hebrews:2:18|). "Thus the Lamb is the true \sungoros\ (like Michael) of the New Israel, its \parakltos pros ton patera\ (1John:2:1|)" (Swete). {Because of the Word of their testimony} (\dia ton logon ts marturias autn\). The same use of \dia\, "because of their testimony to Jesus" as in John's own case in strkjv@1:9|. These martyrs have been true to their part. {They loved not their life even unto death} (\ouk gapsan ten psuchn autn achri thanatou\). First aorist active indicative of \agapa\. They did resist "unto blood" (\mechris haimatos\ strkjv@Hebrews:12:4|) and did not put their own lives before loyalty to Christ. There is a direct reference to the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:12:25| as illustrated also in strkjv@Mark:8:35; strkjv@Matthew:10:39; strkjv@16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24; strkjv@17:33|. Paul's own example is pertinent (Acts:21:13; strkjv@Phillipians:1:20ff.|). Jesus himself had been "obedient unto death" (Phillipians:2:8|). These martyrs seem to be still alive on earth, but their heroism is proleptically pictured.
rwp@Revelation:20:9 @{They went up} (\anebsan\). Second aorist active indicative of \anabain\, a return to the manner of the seer as in verses 4,5|. {Over the breadth of the earth} (\epi to platos ts gs\). \Platos\ is old word, in N.T. only here, strkjv@21:16; strkjv@Ephesians:3:18|. The hosts of Satan spread over the earth. {Compassed} (\ekukleusan\). First aorist (prophetic) active indicative of \kukleu\, to encircle, late verb (Strabo) from \kuklos\ (circle), in N.T. only here and margin in strkjv@John:10:24| (for \ekuklsan\ from \kuklo\). {The camp of the saints} (\tn paremboln tn hagin\). \Parembol\ (\para, en, ball\) is common late word for military camp, in LXX for the Israelites in the desert (Exodus:29:14|, etc.), in N.T. for Roman barracks (Acts:24:34,37|) and for an army in line of battle (Hebrews:11:34; strkjv@Revelation:20:9|). {The beloved city} (\tn polin tn gapmenn\). Perfect passive participle of \agapa\, "the city the beloved." See strkjv@Psalms:78:68; strkjv@87:2| for Jerusalem so described. Songs:Charles takes it here, but Swete holds it to be "the Church the New Zion" that is meant. {And fire came down out of heaven} (\kai kateb pur ek tou ouranou\). Second aorist (prophetic) active indicative of \katabain\. Cf. strkjv@Genesis:19:24; strkjv@39:6; strkjv@Ezekiel:38:22; strkjv@2Kings:1:10,12; strkjv@Luke:9:54| (about John). {Devoured them} (\katephagen autous\). Second aorist (prophetic) active of \katesthi\, to eat up (down). Vivid climax to this last great battle with Satan.
rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE AUTHOR The writer calls himself John (Revelation:1:1,4,9; strkjv@22:8|). But what John? The book can hardly be pseudonymous, though, with the exception of the Shepherd of Hermas, that is the rule with apocalypses. There would have been a clearer claim than just the name. The traditional and obvious way to understand the name is the Apostle John, though Dionysius of Alexandria mentions John Mark as held by some and he himself suggests another John, like the so-called Presbyter John of Papias as quoted by Eusebius. The uncertain language of Papias has raised a deal of questioning. Swete thinks that the majority of modern critics ascribe the Apocalypse to this Presbyter John, to whom Moffatt assigns probably II and III John. Irenaeus represents the Apostle John as having lived to the time of Trajan, at least to A.D. 98. Most ancient writers agree with this extreme old age of John. Justin Martyr states expressly that the Apostle John wrote the Apocalypse. Irenaeus called it the work of a disciple of Jesus. In the ninth century lived Georgius Hamartolus, and a MS. of his alleges that Papias says that John the son of Zebedee was beheaded by the Jews and there is an extract in an Oxford MS. of the seventh century which alleges that Papias says John and James were put to death by the Jews. On the basis of this slim evidence some today argue that John did not live to the end of the century and so did not write any of the Johannine books. But a respectable number of modern scholars still hold to the ancient view that the Apocalypse of John is the work of the Apostle and Beloved Disciple, the son of Zebedee.
rwp@Romans:1:7 @{In Rome} (\en Rmi\). One late uncial (G of tenth century) and a cursive omit these words here and one or two other late MSS. omit \en Rmi\ in verse 15|. This possibly proves the Epistle was circulated as a circular to a limited extent, but the evidence is late and slight and by no means shows that this was the case in the first century. It is not comparable with the absence of \en Ephesi\ in strkjv@Ephesians:1:1| from Aleph and B (the two oldest and best MSS.). {Beloved of God} (\agaptois theou\). Ablative case of \theou\ after the verbal adjective like \didaktoi theou\ (taught of God) in strkjv@John:6:45| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516). {From God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ} (\apo theou patros hmn kai kuriou Isou Christou\). "St. Paul, if not formally enunciating a doctrine of the Divinity of Christ, held a view which cannot really be distinguished from it" (Sanday and Headlam). Paul's theology is clearly seen in the terms used in verses 1-7|.
rwp@Romans:8:37 @{Nay} (\alla\). On the contrary, we shall not be separated. {We are more than conquerors} (\hupernikmen\). Late and rare compound. Here only in N.T. "We gain a surpassing victory through the one who loved us."
rwp@Romans:9:25 @{In Hosea} (\en ti Hse\). He quotes strkjv@2:23| with some freedom. Hosea refers to the ten tribes and Paul applies the principle stated there to the Gentiles. Hosea had a son named _Lo-ammi_ = \ou laos\. Songs:here \ho ou laos mou\ "the not people of mine." \Ou\ with substantives obliterates the meaning of the substantive, an idiom seen in Thucydides and other Greek writers. See also strkjv@Romans:10:19; strkjv@1Peter:2:10|. {Which was not beloved} (\tn ouk gapmenn\). The LXX rendering of _Lo-ruhamah_ (not mercy, without mercy or love), name of Hosea's daughter. The use of \ouk\ with the perfect passive participle is emphatic, since \m\ is the usual negative of the participle in the _Koin_.
rwp@Romans:11:28 @{As touching the gospel} (\kata to euaggelion\). "According to (\kata\ with the accusative) the gospel" as Paul has shown in verses 11-24|, the gospel order as it has developed. {Enemies} (\echthroi\). Treated as enemies (of God), in passive sense, because of their rejection of Christ (verse 10|), just as \agaptoi\ (beloved) is passive. {As touching the election} (\kata tn eklogn\). "According to the election" (the principle of election, not as in verses 5f.| the elect or abstract for concrete). {For the fathers' sake} (\dia tous pateras\). As in strkjv@9:4; strkjv@11:16f|.
rwp@Romans:16:12 @{Tryphaena and Tryphosa} (\Truphainan kai Truphsan\). Probably sisters and possibly twins. Both names come from the same root, the verb \trupha\, to live luxuriously (James:5:5|). Denney suggests "Dainty and Disdain." {Persis} (\Persida\). A freedwoman was so named. She is not Paul's "beloved," but the "beloved" of the whole church.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}