OT-LAW.filter - rwp concerning:
rwp@
1Corinthians:1:2 @{The church of God} (\ti ekklsii tou theou\). Belonging to God, not to any individual or faction, as this genitive case shows. In strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:1| Paul wrote "the church of the Thessalonians in God" (\en thei\), but "the churches of God" in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:14|. See same idiom in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:32; strkjv@11:16,22; strkjv@15:9; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:1; strkjv@Galatians:1:13|, etc. {Which is in Corinth} (\ti ousi en Korinthi\). See on strkjv@Acts:13:1| for idiom. It is God's church even in Corinth, "_laetum et ingens paradoxon_" (Bengel). This city, destroyed by Mummius B.C. 146, had been restored by Julius Caesar a hundred years later, B.C. 44, and now after another hundred years has become very rich and very corrupt. The very word "to Corinthianize" meant to practise vile immoralities in the worship of Aphrodite (Venus). It was located on the narrow Isthmus of the Peloponnesus with two harbours (Lechaeum and Cenchreae). It had schools of rhetoric and philosophy and made a flashy imitation of the real culture of Athens. See strkjv@Acts:18| for the story of Paul's work here and now the later developments and divisions in this church will give Paul grave concern as is shown in detail in I and II Corinthians. All the problems of a modern city church come to the front in Corinth. They call for all the wisdom and statesmanship in Paul. {That are sanctified} (\hgiasmenois\). Perfect passive participle of \hagiaz\, late form for \hagiz\, so far found only in the Greek Bible and in ecclesiastical writers. It means to make or to declare \hagion\ (from \hagos\, awe, reverence, and this from \haz\, to venerate). It is significant that Paul uses this word concerning the {called saints} or {called to be saints} (\kltois hagiois\) in Corinth. Cf. \kltos apostolos\ in strkjv@1:1|. It is because they are sanctified {in Christ Jesus} (\en Christi Isou\). He is the sphere in which this act of consecration takes place. Note plural, construction according to sense, because \ekklsia\ is a collective substantive. {With all that call upon} (\sun psin tois epikaloumenois\). Associative instrumental case with \sun\ rather than \kai\ (and), making a close connection with "saints" just before and so giving the Corinthian Christians a picture of their close unity with the brotherhood everywhere through the common bond of faith. This phrase occurs in the LXX (Genesis:12:8; strkjv@Zechariah:13:9|) and is applied to Christ as to Jehovah (2Thessalonians:1:7,9,12; strkjv@Phillipians:2:9,10|). Paul heard Stephen pray to Christ as Lord (Acts:7:59|). Here "with a plain and direct reference to the Divinity of our Lord" (Ellicott). {Their Lord and ours} (\autn kai hmn\). This is the interpretation of the Greek commentators and is the correct one, an afterthought and expansion (\epanorthsis\) of the previous "our," showing the universality of Christ.
rwp@1Corinthians:1:4 @{I thank my God} (\eucharist ti thei\). Singular as in strkjv@Romans:1:8; strkjv@Phillipians:1:3; strkjv@Philemon:1:4|, but plural in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Colossians:1:3|. The grounds of Paul's thanksgivings in his Epistles are worthy of study. Even in the church in Corinth he finds something to thank God for, though in II Cor. there is no expression of thanksgiving because of the acute crisis in Corinth nor is there any in Galatians. But Paul is gracious here and allows his general attitude (always, \pantote\) concerning (\peri\, around) the Corinthians to override the specific causes of irritation. {For the grace of God which was given to you in Christ Jesus} (\epi ti chariti tou theou ti dotheisi humin en Christi Isou\). Upon the basis of (\epi\) God's grace, not in general, but specifically given (\dotheisi\, first aorist passive participle of \didmi\), in the sphere of (\en\ as in verse 2|) Christ Jesus.
rwp@1Corinthians:1:6 @{Even as} (\kaths\). In proportion as (1Thessalonians:1:5|) and so inasmuch as (Phillipians:1:7; strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|). {The testimony of Christ} (\to marturion tou Christou\). Objective genitive, the testimony to or concerning Christ, the witness of Paul's preaching. {Was confirmed in you} (\ebebaith en humin\). First aorist passive of \bebaio\, old verb from \bebaios\ and that from \bain\, to make to stand, to make stable. These special gifts of the Holy Spirit which they had so lavishly received (ch. strkjv@1Corinthians:12|) were for that very purpose.
rwp@1Corinthians:1:13 @{Is Christ divided?} (\memeristai ho Christos;\). Perfect passive indicative, Does Christ stand divided? It is not certain, though probable, that this is interrogative like the following clauses. Hofmann calls the assertory form a "rhetorical impossibility." The absence of \m\ here merely allows an affirmative answer which is true. The fourth or Christ party claimed to possess Christ in a sense not true of the others. Perhaps the leaders of this Christ party with their arrogant assumptions of superiority are the false apostles, ministers of Satan posing as angels of light (2Corinthians:11:12-15|). {Was Paul crucified for you?} (\M Paulos estaurth huper humn;\). An indignant "No" is demanded by \m\. Paul shows his tact by employing himself as the illustration, rather than Apollos or Cephas. Probably \huper\, over, in behalf of, rather than \peri\ (concerning, around) is genuine, though either makes good sense here. In the _Koin_ \huper\ encroaches on \peri\ as in strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1|. {Were ye baptized into the name of Paul?} (\eis to onoma Paulou ebaptisthte;\). It is unnecessary to say {into} for \eis\ rather than {in} since \eis\ is the same preposition originally as \en\ and both are used with \baptiz\ as in strkjv@Acts:8:16; strkjv@10:48| with no difference in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 592). Paul evidently knows the idea in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| and scouts the notion of being put on a par with Christ or the Trinity. He is no rival of Christ. This use of \onoma\ for the person is not only in the LXX, but the papyri, ostraca, and inscriptions give numerous examples of the name of the king or the god for the power and authority of the king or god (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, pp. 146ff., 196ff.; _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 121).
rwp@1Corinthians:1:31 @{That} (\hina\). Probably ellipse (\gentai\ to be supplied) as is common in Paul's Epistles (2Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:13; strkjv@Galatians:1:20; strkjv@2:9; strkjv@Romans:4:16; strkjv@13:1; strkjv@15:3|). Some explain the imperative \kauchasth\ as an anacoluthon. The shortened quotation is from strkjv@Jeremiah:9:24|. Deissmann notes the importance of these closing verses concerning the origin of Paul's congregations from the lower classes in the large towns as "one of the most important historical witnesses to Primitive Christianity" (_New Light on the N.T._, p. 7; _Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 7, 14, 60, 142).
rwp@1Corinthians:7:1 @{Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote} (\peri de hn egrapsate\). An ellipsis of \peri toutn\, the antecedent of \peri hn\, is easily supplied as in papyri. The church had written Paul a letter in which a number of specific problems about marriage were raised. He answers them _seriatim_. The questions must be clearly before one in order intelligently to interpret Paul's replies. The first is whether a single life is wrong. Paul pointedly says that it is not wrong, but good (\kalon\). One will get a one-sided view of Paul's teaching on marriage unless he keeps a proper perspective. One of the marks of certain heretics will be forbidding to marry (1Timothy:4:3|). Paul uses marriage as a metaphor of our relation to Christ (2Corinthians:11:2; strkjv@Romans:7:4; strkjv@Ephesians:5:28-33|). Paul is not here opposing marriage. He is only arguing that celibacy may be good in certain limitations. The genitive case with \haptesthai\ (touch) is the usual construction.
rwp@1Corinthians:7:25 @{I have no commandment of the Lord} (\epitagn Kuriou ouk ech\). A late word from \epitass\, old Greek verb to enjoin, to give orders to. Paul did have (verse 10|) a command from the Lord as we have in Matthew and Mark. It was quite possible for Paul to know this command of Jesus as he did other sayings of Jesus (Acts:20:35|) even if he had as yet no access to a written gospel or had received no direct revelation on the subject from Jesus (1Corinthians:11:23|). Sayings of Jesus were passed on among the believers. But Paul had no specific word from Jesus on the subject of virgins. They call for special treatment, young unmarried women only Paul means (7:25,28,34,36-38|) and not as in strkjv@Revelation:14:4| (metaphor). It is probable that in the letter (7:1|) the Corinthians had asked about this problem. {But I give my judgment} (\gnmn de didmi\). About mixed marriages (12-16|) Paul had the command of Jesus concerning divorce to guide him. Here he has nothing from Jesus at all. Songs:he gives no "command," but only "a judgment," a deliberately formed decision from knowledge (2Corinthians:8:10|), not a mere passing fancy. {As one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful} (\hs lemenos hupo kuriou pistos einai\). Perfect passive participle of \elee\, old verb to receive mercy (\eleos\). \Pistos\ is predicate nominative with infinitive \einai\. This language, so far from being a disclaimer of inspiration, is an express claim to help from the Lord in the forming of this duly considered judgment, which is in no sense a command, but an inspired opinion.
rwp@1Corinthians:8:1 @{Now concerning things sacrificed to idols} (\peri de tn eidlothutn\). Plainly the Corinthians had asked also about this problem in their letter to Paul (7:1|). This compound adjective (\eidlon\, idol, \thutos\, verbal adjective from \thu\, to sacrifice) is still found only in the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, not so far in the papyri. We have seen this problem mentioned in the decision of the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:29; strkjv@21:25|). The connection between idolatry and impurity was very close, especially in Corinth. See both topics connected in strkjv@Revelation:2:14,20|. By \eidlothuta\ was meant the portion of the flesh left over after the heathen sacrifices. The heathen called it \hierothuton\ (1Corinthians:10:28|). This leftover part "was either eaten sacrificially, or taken home for private meals, or sold in the markets" (Robertson and Plummer). What were Christians to do about eating such portions either buying in the market or eating in the home of another or at the feast to the idol? Three questions are thus involved and Paul discusses them all. There was evidently difference of opinion on the subject among the Corinthian Christians. Aspects of the matter come forward not touched on in the Jerusalem Conference to which Paul does not here allude, though he does treat it in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10|. There was the more enlightened group who acted on the basis of their superior knowledge about the non-existence of the gods represented by the idols. {Ye know that we all have knowledge} (\oidamen hoti pantes gnsin echomen\). This may be a quotation from the letter (Moffatt, _Lit. of N.T._, p. 112). Since their conversion to Christ, they know the emptiness of idol-worship. Paul admits that all Christians have this knowledge (personal experience, \gnsis\), but this problem cannot be solved by knowledge.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:1 @{For} (\gar\). Correct text, not \de\. Paul appeals to the experience of the Israelites in the wilderness in confirmation of his statement concerning himself in strkjv@9:26f.| and as a powerful warning to the Corinthians who may be tempted to flirt with the idolatrous practices of their neighbours. It is a real, not an imaginary peril. {All under the cloud} (\pantes hupo tn nepheln\). They all marched under the pillar of cloud by day (Exodus:13:21; strkjv@14:19|) which covered the host (Numbers:14:14; strkjv@Psalms:95:39|). This mystic cloud was the symbol of the presence of the Lord with the people.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:2 @{Were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea} (\pantes eis ton Musn ebaptisanto en ti nepheli kai en ti thalassi\). The picture is plain enough. The mystic cloud covered the people while the sea rose in walls on each side of them as they marched across. B K L P read \ebaptisanto\ (causative first aorist middle, got themselves baptized) while Aleph A C D have \ebaptisthsan\ (first aorist passive, were baptized). The immersion was complete for all of them in the sea around them and the cloud over them. Moses was their leader then as Christ is now and so Paul uses \eis\ concerning the relation of the Israelites to Moses as he does of our baptism in relation to Christ (Galatians:3:27|).
rwp@1Corinthians:12:1 @{Now concerning spiritual gifts} (\peri de tn pneumatikn\). Clearly one of the items asked about in the letter to Paul (7:1|) and introduced precisely as the problem of meats offered to idols (8:1|). This question runs to the end of chapter 14. Plainly much trouble had arisen in Corinth in the exercise of these gifts.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:44 @{A natural body} (\sma psuchikon\). See on ¯2:14| for this word, a difficult one to translate since \psuch\ has so many meanings. Natural is probably as good a rendering as can be made, but it is not adequate, for the body here is not all \psuch\ either as soul or life. The same difficulty exists as to a spiritual body (\sma pneumatikon\). The resurrection body is not wholly \pneuma\. Caution is needed here in filling out details concerning the \psuch\ and the \pneuma\. But certainly he means to say that the "spiritual body" has some kind of germinal connection with the "natural body," though the development is glorious beyond our comprehension though not beyond the power of Christ to perform (Phillipians:3:21|). The force of the argument remains unimpaired though we cannot follow fully into the thought beyond us. {If there is} (\ei estin\). "If there exists" (\estin\ means this with accent on first syllable), a condition of first class assumed as true. {There is also} (\estin kai\). There exists also.
rwp@1Corinthians:16:1 @{Now concerning the collection for the saints} (\peri de ts logias ts eis tous hagious\). Paul has discussed all the problems raised by the Corinthians. Now he has on his own heart the collection for the saints in Jerusalem (see chapters strkjv@2Corinthians:8; 9|). This word \logia\ (or \-eia\) is now known to be derived from a late verb \logeu\, to collect, recently found in papyri and inscriptions (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 143). The word \logia\ is chiefly found in papyri, ostraca, and inscriptions that tell of religious collections for a god or a temple (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105). The introduction of this topic may seem sudden, but the Corinthians were behind with their part of it. They may even have asked further about it. Paul feels no conflict between discussion of the resurrection and the collection. {Songs:also do ye} (\houts kai humas poisate\). Paul had given orders (\dietaxa\) to the churches of Galatia and now gives them like commands. As a matter of fact, they had promised a long time before this (2Corinthians:8:10; strkjv@9:1-5|). Now do what you pledged.
rwp@Info_1John @ BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander, _Epistles of John_ (Speaker's Comm., 1889). Barrett, _Devotional Comm. on John_ (1910). Baumgartner, _Die Schriften des N.T_. (IV. 3, 1918). Belser, _Komm_. (1906). Bennett, _New-Century Bible_. Brooke, _Int. Crit. Comm_. (Johannine Epistles, 1912). Cox, _Private Letters of St. Paul and St. John_ (1887). Ebrard, _Die Briefe Johannis_ (1859). Ewald, _Die Johanneischen Schriften_ (1861). Findlay, _Fellowship in the Life Eternal_ (1909) Gibbon, _Eternal Life_ (1890). Gore, _Epistles of John_ (1921). Green, _Ephesian Canonical Writings_ (1910). Haring, _Die Johannesbriefe_ (1927). Haupt, _I John_ (1869). Hilgenfeld, _Das Evangelium und die Briefe Johannis nach ihrem Lehrbegriff dargestellt_ (1849). Holtzmann-Bauer, _Hand-Comm. sum N.T_. (1908). Holtzmann, _Das Problem des I Johannesbr. in seinem Ver- haltniss zum Evang_. (Jahrbuch fur Prot. Theologie, 1881, 1882). Huther, _Crit. and Exeget. to the General Eps. of James and John_ (1882). Karl, _Johanneische Studien_ (der I Johannes Brief, 1898). Law, _The Tests of Life_ (1909). Lias, _Epistles of John_ (1887). Loisy, _Les epitres dites de Jean_ (1921) in le quatrieme evan- gile. Lucke, _Comm. on Epistles of John_ (1837). Luthardt, _Strack-Zoeckler Komm_. (1895). Maurice, _The Epistles of St. John_ (1857). Plummer, _Cambridge Greek Test_ (1886). Ramsay, A., _Westminster N.T_. (1910). Ritter, _Die Gemeinschaft der Heiligen_ (1929). Robertson, J. A., _The Johannine Epistles_ (1920). Rothe, _Der erste Brief Johannis_ (1879). Sawtelle, _American Comm_. (1890). Smith, David, _The Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1910). Watson, _Epistles of John_ (1910). Weiss, B., _Die drei Briefe des Apostels Johannis_ (Meyer Komm. 1900). Wendt, _Die Johannesbriefe und das Johanneische Christen- tum_ (1925). Westcott, _The Epistles of St. John_. 3rd ed. (1892). Windisch, _Die Katholischer Briefe_ (Handbuch zum N.T., 2 Aufl., 1930). Wrede, _In Die Heiligen Schriften des N.T_. (2 Aufl., 1924). Wurm, _Die Irrlehrer im I Johannes Brief_ (1903). strkjv@1John:1:1 @{That which} (\ho\). Strictly speaking, the neuter relative here is not personal, but the message "concerning the Word of life" (\peri tou logou ts zs\), a phrase that reminds one at once of the Word (\Logos\) in strkjv@John:1:1,14; strkjv@Revelation:19:14| (an incidental argument for identity of authorship for all these books). For discussion of the \Logos\ see on ¯John:1:1-18|. Here the \Logos\ is described by \ts zs\ (of life), while in strkjv@John:1:4| he is called \h z\ (the Life) as here in verse 2| and as Jesus calls himself (John:11:25; strkjv@14:6|), an advance on the phrase here, and in strkjv@Revelation:19:14| he is termed \ho logos tou theou\ (the Word of God), though in strkjv@John:1:1| the \Logos\ is flatly named \ho theos\ (God). John does use \ho\ in a collective personal sense in strkjv@John:6:37,39|. See also \pan ho\ in strkjv@1John:5:4|. {From the beginning} (\ap' archs\). Anarthrous as in strkjv@John:1:1; strkjv@6:64; strkjv@16:4|. See same phrase in strkjv@2:7|. The reference goes beyond the Christian dispensation, beyond the Incarnation, to the eternal purpose of God in Christ (John:3:16|), "coeval in some sense with creation" (Westcott). {That which we have heard} (\ho akkoamen\). Note fourfold repetition of \ho\ (that which) without connectives (asyndeton). The perfect tense (active indicative of \akou\) stresses John's equipment to speak on this subject so slowly revealed. It is the literary plural unless John associates the elders of Ephesus with himself (Lightfoot) the men who certified the authenticity of the Gospel (John:21:24|). {That which we have seen} (\ho herakamen\). Perfect active, again, of \hora\, with the same emphasis on the possession of knowledge by John. {With our eyes} (\tois ophthalmois hmn\). Instrumental case and showing it was not imagination on John's part, not an optical illusion as the Docetists claimed, for Jesus had an actual human body. He could be heard and seen. {That which we beheld} (\ho etheasametha\). Repetition with the aorist middle indicative of \theaomai\ (the very form in strkjv@John:1:14|), "a spectacle which broke on our astonished vision" (D. Smith). {Handled} (\epslaphsan\). First aorist active indicative of \pslapha\, old and graphic verb (from \psa\, to touch), the very verb used by Jesus to prove that he was not a mere spirit (Luke:24:39|). Three senses are here appealed to (hearing, sight, touch) as combining to show the reality of Christ's humanity against the Docetic Gnostics and the qualification of John by experience to speak. But he is also "the Word of life" and so God Incarnate.
rwp@1John:2:2 @{And he} (\kai autos\). He himself in his own person, both priest and sacrifice (Hebrews:9:14|). {The propitiation} (\hilasmos\). Late substantive from \hilaskomai\ (Luke:18:13; strkjv@Hebrews:2:17|), in LXX, Philo, Plutarch, in N.T. only here and strkjv@4:10|. Christ himself is the means of propitiation for (\peri\ concerning) our sins. See \hilastrion\ in strkjv@Romans:3:15|. {For the whole world} (\peri holou tou kosmou\). It is possible to supply the ellipsis here of \tn hamartin\ (the sins of) as we have it in strkjv@Hebrews:7:27|, but a simpler way is just to regard "the whole world" as a mass of sin (5:19|). At any rate, the propitiation by Christ provides for salvation for all (Hebrews:2:9|) if they will only be reconciled with God (2Corinthians:5:19-21|).
rwp@1John:2:26 @{Concerning them that would lead you astray} (\peri tn planntn humas\). "Concerning those that are trying to lead you astray" (conative use of the present active articular participle of \plana\. See strkjv@1:8| for this verb. John is doing his part to rescue the sheep from the wolves, as Paul did (Acts:20:29|).
rwp@1John:2:27 @{And as for you} (\kai humeis\). Prolepsis again as in verse 24|. {Which ye received of him} (\ho elabete ap' autou\). Second aorist active indicative of \lamban\, a definite experience, this anointing (\chrisma\), from Christ himself as in verse 20|. This Paraclete was promised by Christ (John:14:26; strkjv@16:13ff.|) and came on the great Pentecost, as they knew, and in the experience of all who yielded themselves to the Holy Spirit. {That any one teach you} (\hina tis didaski humas\). Sub-final use of \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \didask\, "that any one keep on teaching you." {Teacheth you} (\didaskei humas\). Present active indicative. The Holy Spirit was to bring all things to their remembrance (John:14:26|) and to bear witness concerning Christ (John:15:26; strkjv@16:12-15|). Yet they need to be reminded of what they already know to be "true" (\althes\) and "no lie" (\ouk estin pseudos\), according to John's habit of positive and negative (1:5|). Songs:he exhorts them to "abide in him" (\menete en auti\, imperative active, though same form as the indicative). Precisely so Jesus had urged that the disciples abide in him (John:15:4f.|).
rwp@1John:5:16 @{If any man see} (\ean tis idi\). Third-class condition with \ean\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \eidon\ (\hora\). {Sinning a sin} (\hamartanonta hamartian\). Present active predicate (supplementary) participle agreeing with \adelphon\ and with cognate accusative \hamartian\. {Not unto death} (\m pros thanaton\). Repeated again with \hamartanousin\ and in contrast with \hamartia pros thanaton\ (sin unto death). Most sins are not mortal sins, but clearly John conceives of a sin that is deadly enough to be called "unto death." This distinction is common in the rabbinic writings and in strkjv@Numbers:18:22| the LXX has \labein hamartian thanatphoron\ "to incur a death-bearing sin" as many crimes then and now bear the death penalty. There is a distinction in strkjv@Hebrews:10:26| between sinning wilfully after full knowledge and sins of ignorance (Hebrews:5:2|). Jesus spoke of the unpardonable sin (Mark:3:29; strkjv@Matthew:12:32; strkjv@Luke:12:10|), which was attributing to the devil the manifest work of the Holy Spirit. It is possible that John has this idea in mind when he applies it to those who reject Jesus Christ as God's Son and set themselves up as antichrists. {Concerning this} (\peri ekeins\). This sin unto death. {That he should make request} (\hina ertsi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with the first aorist active subjunctive of \erta\, used here as in strkjv@John:17:15,20| (and often) for request rather than for question. John does not forbid praying for such cases; he simply does not command prayer for them. He leaves them to God.
rwp@1Peter:1:10 @{Concerning which salvation} (\peri hs strias\). Another relative clause (taking up \stria\ from verse 9| and incorporating it) in this long sentence (verses 3-12|, inclusive, all connected by relatives). Peter lingers over the word \stria\ (salvation) with something new to say each time (Bigg). Here it is the general sense of the gospel of grace. {Sought} (\exeztsan\). First aorist active indicative of \ekzte\, to seek out (Acts:15:17|), late and rare compound, only in LXX and N.T. save once in Aristides. {Searched diligently} (\exraunsan\). First aorist active indicative of \exerauna\, old and common compound (\exereuna\), to search out diligently, here only in N.T. Both of these words occur together in I Macc. strkjv@9:26. {Of the grace that should come unto you} (\peri ts eis humas charitos\). "Concerning the for you grace" (meant for you).
rwp@1Peter:1:11 @{Searching} (\eraunntes\). Present active participle of \erauna\, late form for older \ereuna\ (both in the papyri), uncompounded verb (John:7:52|), the compound occurring in verse 10| above. {What time or what manner of time} (\eis tina poion kairon\). Proper sense of \poios\ (qualitative interrogative) kept here as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:35, strkjv@Romans:3:27|, though it is losing its distinctive sense from \tis\ (Acts:23:34|). The prophets knew what they prophesied, but not at what time the Messianic prophecies would be fulfilled. {The Spirit of Christ which was in them} (\to en autois pneuma Christou\). Peter definitely asserts here that the Spirit of Jesus Christ (the Messiah) was in the Old Testament prophets, the Holy Spirit called the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God (Romans:8:9|), who spoke to the prophets as he would speak to the apostles (John:16:14|). {Did point unto} (\edlou\). Imperfect active of \dlo\, to make plain, "did keep on pointing to," though they did not clearly perceive the time. {When it testified beforehand} (\promarturomenon\). Present middle participle of \promarturomai\, a late compound unknown elsewhere save in a writer of the fourteenth century (Theodorus Mech.) and now in a papyrus of the eighth. It is neuter here because \pneuma\ is neuter, but this grammatical gender should not be retained as "it" in English, but should be rendered "he" (and so as to strkjv@Acts:8:15|). Here we have predictive prophecy concerning the Messiah, though some modern critics fail to find predictions of the Messiah in the Old Testament. {The sufferings of Christ} (\ta eis Christon pathmata\). "The sufferings for (destined for) Christ" like the use of \eis\ in verse 10| (\eis humas\ for you). {The glories that should follow them} (\tas meta tauta doxas\). "The after these things (sufferings) glories." The plural of \doxa\ is rare, but occurs in strkjv@Exodus:15:11; strkjv@Hosea:9:11|. The glories of Christ followed the sufferings as in strkjv@4:13; strkjv@5:1,6|.
rwp@1Peter:3:15 @{Sanctify} (\hagiasate\). First aorist active imperative of \hagiaz\. This instead of being afraid. {Christ as Lord} (\kurion ton Christon\). \Ton Christon\, direct object with article and \kurion\ predicate accusative (without article). This is the correct text, not \ton theon\ of the Textus Receptus. An adaptation to Christ of strkjv@Isaiah:8:13|. {Being ready always} (\hetoimoi aei\). No participle in the Greek, old adjective (Titus:3:1|). {To give answer} (\pros apologian\). "For an apology," the old sense of \apologia\, an answer back, a defence (not excuse), as in strkjv@Acts:22:1|, from \apologeomai\ to defend (not to apologize). {A reason concerning the hope that is in you} (\logon peri ts en humin elpidos\). Original sense of \logon\ (accusative of the thing with \aitounti\ with \hums\, accusative of the person) "concerning the in you hope." Ready with a spoken defence of the inward hope. This attitude calls for an intelligent grasp of the hope and skill in presenting it. In Athens every citizen was expected to be able to join in the discussion of state affairs. {Yet with meekness and fear} (\alla meta prauttos kai phobou\). Of God (2:18; strkjv@3:2,4|), not of man.
rwp@1Peter:3:18 @{Because Christ also died} (\hoti kai Christos apethanen\). Songs:the best MSS.; later ones \epathen\ (suffered). The example of Christ should stir us to patient endurance. {For sins} (\peri hamartin\). "Concerning sins" (not his, but ours, strkjv@1:18|). \Peri\ (around, concerning) with \hamartias\ in the regular phrase for the sin offering (Leviticus:5:7; strkjv@6:30|), though \huper hamartias\ does occur (Ezekiel:43:25|). Songs:in the N.T. we find both \peri hamartin\ (Hebrews:5:3|) and \huper hamartin\ (Hebrews:5:1|). {Once} (\hapax\). Once for all (Hebrews:9:28|), not once upon a time (\pote\). {The righteous for the unrighteous} (\dikaios huper adikn\). Literally, "just for unjust" (no articles). See strkjv@1Peter:2:19| for the sinlessness of Christ as the one perfect offering for sin. This is what gives Christ's blood value. He has no sin himself. Some men today fail to perceive this point. {That he might bring us to God} (\hina hms prosagagi ti thei\). Purpose clause with \hina\, with second aorist active subjunctive of \prosag\ and the dative case \ti thei\. The MSS. vary between \hms\ (us) and \hums\ (you). The verb \prosag\ means to lead or bring to (Matthew:18:24|), to approach God (cf. \prosaggn\ in strkjv@Ephesians:2:18|), to present us to God on the basis of his atoning death for us, which has opened the way (Romans:3:25; strkjv@Hebrews:10:19f|.) {Being put to death in the flesh} (\thanattheis men sarki\). First aorist passive participle of \thanato\, old verb (from \thanatos\ death), to put to death. \Sarki\ is locative case of \sarx\. {But quickened in the spirit} (\zopoitheis de pneumati\). First aorist passive participle of \zopoie\ rare (Aristotle) verb (from \zopoios\ making alive), to make alive. The participles are not antecedent to \apethanen\, but simultaneous with it. There is no such construction as the participle of subsequent action. The spirit of Christ did not die when his flesh did, but "was endued with new and greater powers of life" (Thayer). See strkjv@1Corinthians:15:22| for the use of the verb for the resurrection of the body. But the use of the word \pneumati\ (locative case) in contrast with \sarki\ starts Peter's mind off in a long comparison by way of illustration that runs from verses 19-22|. The following verses have caused more controversy than anything in the Epistle.
rwp@1Peter:4:12 @{Think it not strange} (\m xenizesthe\). Prohibition with \m\ and the present passive imperative of \xeniz\, for which verb see strkjv@4:4|. "Be not amazed." {Concerning the fiery trial among you} (\tei en humin pursei\). Instrumental case, "by the among you burning," metaphorical sense of old word (since Aristotle), from \puro\, to burn (\pur\ fire). See strkjv@1:7| for the metaphor. See strkjv@Revelation:18:9,18| only other N.T. examples. It occurs in strkjv@Proverbs:27:21| for the smelting of gold and silver and so in strkjv@Psalms:56:10| (LXX strkjv@65:10): "Thou didst smelt us as silver is smelted" (\epursas hms hs puroutai to argurion\). {Which cometh upon you} (\humin ginomeni\). Present middle participle of \ginomai\ (already coming) with dative case \humin\. {To prove you} (\pros peirasmon\). "For testing." {As though a strange thing happened unto you} (\hs xenou humin sumbainontos\). Genitive absolute with \hs\, giving the alleged reason, and \humin\, dative case with \sumbainontos\ (present active participle of \sumbain\, to go together, to happen (Mark:10:32|), agreeing with \xenou\ (strange, strkjv@Hebrews:13:9|).
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:1 @{For yourselves know} (\autoi gar oidate\). This explanatory \gar\ takes up in verses 1-12| the allusion in strkjv@1:9| about the "report" concerning the entrance (\eisodon\, way in, \eis, hodon\), {unto you} (\tn pros hums\). Note repeated article to sharpen the point. This proleptic accusative is common enough. It is expanded by the epexegetic use of the \hoti\ clause {that it hath not been found vain} (\hoti ou ken gegonen\). Literally, {that it has not become empty}. Second perfect active (completed state) of \ginomai\. Every pastor watches wistfully to see what will be the outcome of his work. Bengel says: _Non inanis, sed plena virtutis_. Cf. strkjv@1:5|. \Kenos\ is hollow, empty, while \mataios\ is fruitless, ineffective. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:14,17| Paul speaks of \kenon to krugma\ ({empty the preaching}) and \mataia h pistis\ ({vain the faith}). One easily leads to the other.
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:5 @{Using words of flattery} (\en logi kolakeias\). Literally, {in speech of flattery or fawning}. Old word, only here in N.T., from \kolaks\, a flatterer. An Epicurean, Philodemus, wrote a work \Peri Kolakeias\ (Concerning Flattery). Milligan (_Vocabulary_, etc.) speaks of "the selfish conduct of too many of the rhetoricians of the day," conduct extremely repugnant to Paul. The third time (verses 1,2,5|) he appeals to their knowledge of his work in Thessalonica. Frame suggests "cajolery." {Nor a cloke of covetousness} (\oute prophasei pleonexias\). Pretext (\prophasis\ from \prophain\, to show forth, or perhaps from \pro-phmi\, to speak forth). This is the charge of self-interest rather than the mere desire to please people. Pretext of greediness is Frame's translation. \Pleonexia\ is merely "having more" from \pleonekts\, one eager for more, and \pleonekte\, to have more, then to over-reach, all old words, all with bad meaning as the result of the desire for more. In a preacher this sin is especially fatal. Paul feels so strongly his innocence of this charge that he calls God as witness as in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:23; strkjv@Romans:9:1; strkjv@Phillipians:1:8|, a solemn oath for his own veracity.
rwp@1Thessalonians:3:9 @{Render again unto God} (\ti thei antapodounai\). Second aorist active infinitive of double compound verb \ant-apodidmi\, to give back (\apo\) in return for (\anti\). Old verb rare in N.T., but again in strkjv@2Thessalonians:1:6|. {For you} (\peri humn\). Around (concerning) you, while in verse 2| \huper\ (over is used for "concerning your faith." {For} (\epi\). Basis again as cause or ground for the joy. {Wherewith we joy} (\hi chairomen\). Probably cognate accusative \hn\ with \chairomen\ attracted to locative \chari\ (Matthew:2:10|).
rwp@1Thessalonians:4:9 @{Concerning love of the brethren} (\peri ts philadelphias\). Late word, love of brothers or sisters. In profane Greek (one papyrus example) and LXX the word means love of those actually kin by blood, but in the N.T. it is the kinship in the love of Christ as here. {Are taught by God} (\theodidaktoi este\). Only here and ecclesiastical writers. Passive verbal adjective in \-tos\ from \didask\ as if \theo-\ in ablative case like \didaktoi theou\ (John:6:45|). {To love one another} (\eis to agapin alllous\). Another example of \eis to\ and the infinitive. Only those taught of God keep on loving one another, love neighbours and even enemies as Jesus taught (Matthew:5:44|). Note the use of \agapa\, not \phile\.
rwp@1Thessalonians:4:13 @{We would not have} (\ou thelomen\). We do not wish. {You ignorant} (\humas agnoein\). Old word, not to know (\a\ privative, \gno-\, root of \ginsk\). No advantage in ignorance of itself. {Concerning them that fall asleep} (\peri tn koimmenn\). Present passive (or middle) participle (Aleph B) rather than the perfect passive \kekoimmenn\ of many later MSS. From old \koima\, to put to sleep. Present tense gives idea of repetition, from time to time fall asleep. Greeks and Romans used this figure of sleep for death as Jesus does (John:11:11|) and N.T. generally (cf. our word _cemetery_). Somehow the Thessalonians had a false notion about the dead in relation to the second coming. {Even as the rest which have no hope} (\kaths hoi loipoi hoi m echontes elpida\). This picture of the hopelessness of the pagan world about the future life is amply illustrated in ancient writings and particularly by inscriptions on tombs (Milligan). Some few pagans clung to this hope, but most had none.
rwp@1Thessalonians:5:1 @{But concerning the times and the seasons} (\peri de tn chronn kai tn kairn\). See both words used also in strkjv@Titus:1:2f|. \Chronos\ is rather an extended period and \kairos\ a definite space of time.
rwp@1Timothy:1:19 @{Holding faith and a good conscience} (\echn pistin kai agathn suneidsin\). Possibly as a shield (Ephesians:6:16|) or at any rate possessing (Romans:2:20|) faith as trust and a good conscience. A leader expects them of his followers and must show them himself. {Having thrust from them} (\apsamenoi\). First aorist indirect middle participle of \apthe\, to push away from one. Old verb (see strkjv@Romans:11:1f.|). {Made shipwreck} (\enauagsan\). First aorist active indicative of \nauage\, old verb from \nauagos\ (shipwrecked, \naus\, ship, \agnumi\, to break), to break a ship to pieces. In N.T. only here and strkjv@2Corinthians:11:25|. {Concerning the faith} (\peri tn pistin\). Rather, "concerning their faith" (the article here used as a possessive pronoun, a common Greek idiom).
rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ The occasion of the Epistle is made plain by numerous allusions personal and otherwise. Paul had arrived in Ephesus from Antioch shortly after the departure of Apollos for Corinth with letters of commendation from Priscilla and Aquila (Acts:18:28-19:1|). It is not clear how long Apollos remained in Corinth, but he is back in Ephesus when Paul writes the letter and he has declined Paul's request to go back to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:12|). Some of the household of Chloe had heard or come from Corinth with full details of the factions in the church over Apollos and Paul, clearly the reason why Apollos left (1Corinthians:1:10-12|). Even Cephas nominally was drawn into it, though there is no evidence that Peter himself had come to Corinth. Paul had sent Timothy over to Corinth to put an end to the factions (1Corinthians:4:17|), though he was uneasy over the outcome (1Corinthians:16:10f.|). This disturbance was enough of itself to call forth a letter from Paul. But it was by no means the whole story. Paul had already written a letter, now lost to us, concerning a peculiarly disgusting case of incest in the membership (1Corinthians:5:9|). They were having lawsuits with one another before heathen judges. Members of the church had written Paul a letter about marriage whether any or all should marry (1Corinthians:7:1|). They were troubled also whether it was right to eat meat that had been offered to idols in the heathen temples (1Corinthians:8:1|). Spiritual gifts of an unusual nature were manifested in Corinth and these were the occasion of a deal of trouble (1Corinthians:12:1|). The doctrine of the resurrection gave much trouble in Corinth (1Corinthians:15:12|). Paul was interested in the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem (1Corinthians:16:1|) and in their share in it. The church in Corinth had sent a committee (Stephanas, Fortunatus, Achaicus) to Paul in Ephesus. He hopes to come himself after passing through Macedonia (1Corinthians:16:5f.|). It is possible that he had made a short visit before this letter (2Corinthians:13:1|), though not certain as he may have intended to go one time without going as he certainly once changed his plans on the subject (2Corinthians:1:15-22|). Whether Titus took the letter on his visit or it was sent on after the return of Timothy is not perfectly clear. Probably Timothy returned to Ephesus from Corinth shortly after the epistle was sent on, possibly by the committee who returned to Corinth (1Corinthians:16:17|), for Timothy and Erastus were sent on from Ephesus to Macedonia before the outbreak at the hands of Demetrius (Acts:19:22|). Apparently Timothy had not fully succeeded in reconciling the factions in Corinth for Paul dispatched Titus who was to meet him at Troas as he went on to Macedonia. Paul's hurried departure from Ephesus (Acts:20:1|) took him to Troas before Titus arrived and Paul's impatience there brought him to Macedonia where he did meet Titus on his return from Corinth (2Corinthians:2:12f.|).
rwp@2Corinthians:1:8 @{Concerning our affliction} (\huper ts thlipses hmn\). Manuscripts read also \peri\ for in the _Koin_ \huper\ (over) often has the idea of \peri\ (around). Paul has laid down his philosophy of afflictions and now he cites a specific illustration in his own recent experience. {In Asia} (\en Asii\). Probably in Ephesus, but what it was we do not know whether sickness or peril. We do know that the disciples and the Asiarchs would not allow Paul to face the mob in the amphitheatre gathered by Demetrius (Acts:20:30f.|). In strkjv@Romans:16:4| Paul says that Prisca and Aquila laid down their necks for him, risked their very lives for him. It may have been a later plot to kill Paul that hastened his departure from Ephesus (Acts:20:1|). He had a trial so great that "we were weighed down exceedingly beyond our power" (\kath' huperboln huper dunamin ebarthmen\). Old verb from \baros\, weight, \barus\, weighty. First aorist passive indicative. See on ¯1Corinthians:12:31| for \kath' huperboln\ (cf. our hyperbole). It was beyond Paul's power to endure if left to himself. {Insomuch that we despaired even of life} (\hste exaporthnai hmas kai tou zin\). Usual clause of result with \hste\ and the infinitive. First aorist passive infinitive \exaporthnai\, late compound for utter despair (perfective use of \ex\ and at a complete loss, \a\ privative and \poros\, way). There seemed no way out. {Of life} (\tou zin\). Ablative case of the articular infinitive, of living.
rwp@2Corinthians:12:8 @{Concerning this thing} (\huper toutou\). More likely, "concerning this messenger of Satan." {That it might depart from me} (\hina aposti aph' emou\). Second aorist active (intransitive) subjunctive of \aphistmi\ in final clause, "that he stand off from me for good."
rwp@Info_2Peter @ THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER ABOUT A.D. 66 OR 67 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION MOST DOUBTFUL NEW TESTAMENT BOOK Every book in the New Testament is challenged by some one, as indeed the historicity of Jesus Christ himself is and the very existence of God. But it is true that more modern scholars deny the genuineness of II Peter than that of any single book in the canon. This is done by men like F. H. Chase, J. B. Mayor, and R. D. Strachan, who are followers of Christ as Lord and Saviour. One has to admit that the case concerning II Peter has problems of peculiar difficulty that call for careful consideration and balanced judgment. One other word needs to be said, which is that an adverse decision against the authenticity of II Peter stands by itself and does not affect the genuineness of the other books. It is easy to take an extreme position for or against it without full knowledge of all the evidence.
rwp@2Peter:3:9 @{Is not slack concerning his promise} (\ou bradunei ts epaggelias\). Ablative case \epaggelias\ after \bradunei\ (present active indicative of \bradun\, from \bradus\, slow), old verb, to be slow in, to fall short of (like \leipetai sophias\ in strkjv@James:1:5|), here and strkjv@1Timothy:3:15| only in N.T. {Slackness} (\bradutta\). Old substantive from \bradus\ (James:1:19|), here only in N.T. God is not impotent nor unwilling to execute his promise. {To youward} (\eis humas\). \Pros\ rather than \eis\ after \makrothumei\ in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:14| and \epi\ in strkjv@James:5:7|, etc. {Not wishing} (\m boulomenos\). Present middle participle of \boulomai\. Some will perish (verse 7|), but that is not God's desire. Any (\tinas\). Rather than "some" (\tines\) above. Accusative with the infinitive \apolesthai\ (second aorist middle of \apollumi\. God wishes "all" (\pantas\) to come (\chrsai\ first aorist active infinitive of \chre\, old verb, to make room). See strkjv@Acts:17:30; strkjv@Romans:11:32; strkjv@1Timothy:2:4; strkjv@Hebrews:2:9| for God's provision of grace for all who will repent.
rwp@2Thessalonians:2:1 @{Touching the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\huper ts parousias tou Kuriou (hmn) Isou Christou\). For \ertmen\, to beseech, see on ¯1Thessalonians:4:1; strkjv@4:12|. \Huper\ originally meant over, in behalf of, instead of, but here it is used like \peri\, around, concerning as in strkjv@1:4; strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:2; strkjv@5:10|, common in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 632). For the distinction between \Parousia, Epiphaneia\ (Epiphany), and \Apokalupsis\ (Revelation) as applied to the Second Coming of Christ see Milligan on _Thessalonian Epistles_, pp. 145-151, in the light of the papyri. \Parousia\ lays emphasis on the {presence} of the Lord with his people, \epiphaneia\ on his {manifestation} of the power and love of God, \apokalupsis\ on the {revelation} of God's purpose and plan in the Second Coming of the Lord Jesus. {And our gathering together unto him} (\kai hmn episunaggs ep' auton\). A late word found only in II Macc. strkjv@2:7; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1; strkjv@Hebrews:10:25| till Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 103) found it on a stele in the island of Syme, off Caria, meaning "collection." Paul is referring to the rapture, mentioned in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:15-17|, and the being forever with the Lord thereafter. Cf. also strkjv@Matthew:24:31; strkjv@Mark:13:27|.
rwp@2Timothy:1:3 @{I thank} (\charin ech\). "I have gratitude." As in strkjv@1Timothy:1:12|. Robinson cites examples of this phrase from the papyri. It occurs also in strkjv@Luke:17:9; strkjv@Acts:2:47|. \Charis\ in doxologies Paul uses (1Corinthians:15:57; strkjv@2:14; strkjv@8:16; strkjv@9:15; strkjv@Romans:6:17; strkjv@7:25|). His usual idiom is \eucharist\ (1Corinthians:1:4; strkjv@Romans:1:8; strkjv@Philemon:1:4; strkjv@Phillipians:1:3|) or \eucharistoumen\ (1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Colossians:1:3|) or \ou pauomai eucharistn\ (Ephesians:1:16|) or \eucharistein opheilomen\ (2Thessalonians:1:3|). {Whom I serve from my forefathers} (\hi latreu apo progonn\). The relative \hi\ is the dative case with \latreu\ (see strkjv@Romans:1:9| for this verb), progressive present (I have been serving). For \progonn\ (forefathers) see strkjv@1Timothy:5:4|. Paul claims a pious ancestry as in strkjv@Acts:24:14; strkjv@Acts:26:5; strkjv@Galatians:2:14; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {In a pure conscience} (\en kathari suneidsei\). See strkjv@1Timothy:1:5; strkjv@Acts:23:1|. {Unceasing} (\adialeipton\). Late and rare compound, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:9:2| which see. The adverb \adialeipts\ is more frequent (in the papyri, literary _Koin_, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Romans:1:9|). The adjective here is the predicate accusative, "how I hold the memory concerning thee unceasing." The use of \adialeipts\ (adverb) is a sort of epistolary formula (papyri, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@2:13; strkjv@5:17; strkjv@Romans:1:9|). {Remembrance} (\mneian\). Old word, in N.T. only Pauline (seven times, strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:2; strkjv@Romans:1:9; strkjv@Phillipians:1:3|).
rwp@2Timothy:1:6 @{For the which cause} (\di' hn aitian\). "For which cause," stronger than \dio\. Songs:in verse 12; strkjv@Titus:1:13|. Only example of \aitia\ by Paul save in strkjv@Acts:28:20|. {I put thee in remembrance} (\anamimnsk\). Old compound to remind (1Corinthians:4:17; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:15|). {That thou stir up} (\se anazpurein\). Present active infinitive of \anazpure\, old double compound (\ana\ and \zpuron\, live coal, \zos\ and \pur\, then the bellows for kindling), to rekindle, to stir into flame, to keep blazing (continuous action, present time), only here in N.T. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:19| for the figure of fire concerning the Holy Spirit. See \anapt\ in strkjv@Luke:12:49|. {The gift of God} (\to charisma tou theou\). See strkjv@1Timothy:4:14|. Here Paul says \mou\ (my), there he mentions the presbytery. Paul felt a deep personal interest in Timothy. See strkjv@1Corinthians:7:7; strkjv@Romans:6:23; strkjv@11:29| for the gift of God.
rwp@3John:1:2 @{I pray} (\euchomai\). Here only in John's writings. See strkjv@Romans:9:3|. {In all things} (\peri pantn\). To be taken with \euodousthai\ and like \peri\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:1|, "concerning all things." {Thou mayest prosper} (\se euodousthai\). Infinitive in indirect discourse (object infinitive) after \euchomai\, with accusative of general reference \se\ (as to thee). \Euodo\ is old verb (from \euodos\, \eu\ and \hodos\, prosperous in a journey), to have a good journey, to prosper, in LXX, in N.T. only this verse (twice), strkjv@1Corinthians:16:2; strkjv@Romans:1:10|. {Be in health} (\hugiainein\). In Paul this word always means sound teaching (1Timothy:1:10; strkjv@6:3|), but here and in strkjv@Luke:5:31; strkjv@7:10; strkjv@15:27|, of bodily health. Brooke wonders if Gaius' health had caused his friends anxiety. {Even as thy soul prospereth} (\kaths euodoutai sou h psuch\). A remarkable comparison which assumes the welfare (present middle indicative of \euodo\) of his soul (\psuch\ here as the principle of the higher life as in strkjv@John:12:27|, not of the natural life as in strkjv@Matthew:6:25|).
rwp@Info_Acts @ LUKE THE AUTHOR It ought to be possible to assume this as a fact since the work of Ramsay and Harnack on various phases of the problems concerning the Acts. Harnack, in particular, has covered the ground with his accustomed thoroughness and care in his two volumes (_The Acts of the Apostles_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1909; _The Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, English Translation by Rev. J. R. Wilkinson, 1911). Ramsay's view may be found in Chapter I of _St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen_, Chapter XII of _Pauline and Other Studies_. A good summary of the matter appears in Part V of _The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_ by Dr. D. A. Hayes, in Robertson's _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, and in the introduction to the various commentaries by Knowling, Rackham, Furneaux, Rendall, Hackett, Meyer-Wendt, Zahn, Blass, Campbell-Morgan, Stokes. In Part I of _The Acts of the Apostles_, Vol. II of _The Beginnings of Christianity_, edited by Foakes-Jackson and Kirsopp Lake both sides are ably presented: _The Case for the Tradition_ by C. W. Emmet, _The Case against the Tradition_ by H. Windisch. _The Internal Evidence of Acts_ is discussed by the Editors, Foakes-Jackson and Lake, with an adverse conclusion against Luke. Henry J. Cadbury surveys _The Tradition_ (the external evidence) and draws a negative conclusion likewise on the ground that the early writers who ascribe Acts to Luke were not critical scholars. A similar position is taken by Cadbury in his more recent volume, _The Making of Luke--Acts_ (1927). But all the same the traditional view that Luke is the author of the Acts holds the field with those who are not prejudiced against it. The view of Baur that Acts is a _Tendenz_ writing for the purpose of healing the breach between Peter and Paul and showing that the two factions came together had great influence for a while. In fact both Ramsay and Harnack at first held it. Ramsay broke away first and he was followed by Harnack. Both were influenced to change their views by the accumulation of evidence to the effect that the author of both the Gospel and Acts is Luke the Physician and Friend of Paul. Part of this evidence has already been given in the Introduction to the Gospel according to Luke.
rwp@Info_Acts @ THE AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL ALSO The author of the Acts expressly states that he wrote "the first treatise (\ton prton logon\) concerning all things, O Theophilus, that Jesus began both to do and to teach until which day he gave command through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen and was received up" (Acts:1:1f.|). There is no room for dispute that the reference is directly to the Gospel according to Luke as we have it now. Like the Gospel the book is dedicated to Theophilus. And, what is even more important, the same style appears in both Gospel and Acts. This fact Harnack has shown with great pains and conclusiveness. There is the same interest in medical matters and even Cadbury, who denies by implication the Lukan authorship, admits identity of authorship for both books.
rwp@Info_Acts @ THE HISTORICAL VALUE It was once a fad with a certain school of critics to decry Luke in the Acts as wholly untrustworthy, not above the legendary stage. But the spade has done well by Luke for inscriptions and papyri have brought remarkable confirmation for scores of points where Luke once stood all alone and was discounted because he stood alone. These will be duly noted in the proper places as they occur. Ramsay has done most in this restoration of the rank of Luke as a credible historian, as shown in particular in his _St. Paul the Traveller and the Roman Citizen_ and in _The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament_. In every instance where discoveries have been made they have confirmed the testimony of Luke as concerning _politarchs_ in Thessalonica, _proconsul_ in Cyprus, etc. The result is that the balance of evidence is now in favour of Luke even when he still stands alone or seems to be opposed by Josephus. Luke, as it stands today, is a more credible historian than Josephus. Ramsay dares to call Luke, all things considered, the greatest of all historians, even above Thucydides. An interesting book on this phase of the subject is Chase's _The Credibility of the Acts of the Apostles_ (1902).
rwp@Info_Acts @ THE TEXT OF THE ACTS A special problem arises concerning the text of Acts inasmuch as the Codex Bezae (D) with some other Western support presents a great many additions to the Neutral-Alexandrian text of Aleph A B C. Blass has even proposed the idea that Luke himself issued two editions of the book, an attractive hypothesis that is not generally accepted. J. M. Wilson has published _The Acts of the Apostles from Codex Bezae_. The whole subject is elaborately treated by J. H. Ropes in Vol. III, _The Text of Acts_ in Part I of _The Beginnings of Christianity_. Besides thorough discussion of all the problems of text involved Ropes gives the text of the Vatican Codex (B) on the left page and that of Codex Bezae (D) on the right, making comparison easy. Blass's ideas appear in his _Acta Apostolorum_.
rwp@Acts:1:3 @{To whom also} (\hois kai\). He chose them and then also manifested himself to these very same men that they might have personal witness to give. {Shewed himself alive} (\parestsen heauton znta\). To the disciples the first Sunday evening (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:36-43; strkjv@John:20:19-25|), the second Sunday evening (John:20:26-29|), at the Sea of Tiberias (John:21:1-23|), on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6|), to the disciples in Jerusalem and Olivet (Luke:24:44-53; strkjv@Mark:16-19f.; strkjv@Acts:1:1-11|). Luke uses this verb \paristmi\ 13 times in the Acts both transitively and intransitively. It is rendered by various English words (present, furnish, provide, assist, commend). The early disciples including Paul never doubted the fact of the Resurrection, once they were convinced by personal experience. At first some doubted like Thomas (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:41; strkjv@John:20:24f.; strkjv@Matthew:28:17|). But after that they never wavered in their testimony to their own experience with the Risen Christ, "whereof we are witnesses" Peter said (Acts:3:15|). They doubted at first, that we may believe, but at last they risked life itself in defence of this firm faith. {After his passion} (\meta to pathein auton\). Neat Greek idiom, \meta\ with the articular infinitive (second aorist active of \pasch\) and the accusative of general reference, "after the suffering as to him." For \pathein\ used absolutely of Christ's suffering see also strkjv@Acts:17:3; strkjv@26:23|. {By many proofs} (\en pollois tekmriois\). Literally, "in many proofs." \Tekmrion\ is only here in the N.T., though an old and common word in ancient Greek and occurring in the _Koin_ (papyri, etc.). The verb \tekmair\, to prove by sure signs, is from \tekmar\, a sign. Luke does not hesitate to apply the definite word "proofs" to the evidence for the Resurrection of Christ after full investigation on the part of this scientific historian. Aristotle makes a distinction between \tekmrion\ (proof) and \smeion\ (sign) as does Galen the medical writer. {Appearing} (\optanomenos\). Present middle participle from late verb \optan\, late _Koin_ verb from root \opt\ seen in \opsomai, phthn\. In LXX, papyri of second century B.C. (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 83). Only here in the N.T. For \optasia\ for vision see strkjv@Acts:26:19; strkjv@Luke:1:22; strkjv@24:23|. {By the space of forty days} (\di' hmern tesserakonta\). At intervals (\dia\, between) during the forty days, ten appearances being known to us. Jesus was not with them continually now in bodily presence. The period of forty days is given here alone. The Ascension was thus ten days before Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came. Moses was in the mount forty days (Exodus:24:18|) and Jesus fasted forty days (Matthew:4:2|). In the Gospel of Luke 24 this separation of forty days between the Resurrection and the Ascension is not drawn. {The things concerning the Kingdom of God} (\ta peri ts basileias tou theou\). This phrase appears 33 times in Luke's Gospel, 15 times in Mark, 4 times in Matthew who elsewhere has "the kingdom of heaven," once in John, and 6 times in Acts. No essential distinction is to be drawn between the two for the Jews often used "heaven" rather than "God" to avoid using the Tetragrammaton. But it is noticeable how the word kingdom drops out of Acts. Other words like gospel (\euaggelion\) take the place of "kingdom." Jesus was fond of the word "kingdom" and Luke is fond of the idiom "the things concerning" (\ta peri\). Certainly with Jesus the term "kingdom" applies to the present and the future and covers so much that it is not strange that the disciples with their notions of a political Messianic kingdom (Acts:1:6|) were slow to comprehend the spiritual nature of the reign of God.
rwp@Acts:4:9 @{Concerning a good deed done to an impotent man} (\epi euergesii anthrpou asthenous\). Objective genitive. Note \euergesia\ (old word, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:6:2|), as a benefactor, not a malefactor. Skilful turn made by Peter. {Is made whole} (\sesstai\). Perfect passive indicative of \sz\, stands whole.
rwp@Acts:7:1 @{Are these things so?} (\ei tauta houts echei\). On this use of \ei\ in a direct question see on ¯1:6|. Literally "Do these things hold thus?" A formal question by the high priest like our "Do you plead guilty, or not guilty?" (Furneaux). The abrupt question of the high priest would serve to break the evident spell of the angelic look on Stephen's face. Two charges had been made against Stephen (1) speaking against the holy temple, (2) changing the customs which Moses had delivered. Stephen could not give a yes or no answer to these two charges. There was an element of truth in each of them and a large amount of error all mixed together. Songs:he undertakes to explain his real position by the historical method, that is to say, by a rapid survey of God's dealing with the people of Israel and the Gentiles. It is the same method adopted by Paul in Pisidian Antioch (Acts:13:16ff.|) after he had become the successor of Stephen in his interpretation of the universal mission of Christianity. If one is disposed to say that Luke made up this speech to suit Stephen's predicament, he has to explain how the style is less Lukan than the narrative portions of Acts with knowledge of Jewish traditions that a Greek would not be likely to know. Precisely how Luke obtained the data for the speech we do not know, but Saul heard it and Philip, one of the seven, almost certainly. Both could have given Luke help about it. It is even possible that some one took notes of this important address. We are to remember also that the speech was interrupted at the end and may not include all that Stephen meant to say. But enough is given to give us a good idea of how Stephen met the first charge "by showing that the worship of God is not confined to Jerusalem or the Jewish temple" (Page). Then he answers the second charge by proving that God had many dealings with their fathers before Moses came and that Moses foretold the coming of the Messiah who is now known to be Jesus. It is at this point (verse 51|) that Stephen becomes passionate and so powerful that the wolves in the Sanhedrin lose all self-control. It is a great and masterful exposition of the worldwide mission of the gospel of Christ in full harmony with the Great Commission of Christ. The apostles had been so busy answering the Sadducees concerning the Resurrection of Christ and maintaining their freedom to teach and preach that they had not pushed the world-wide propaganda of the gospel as Jesus had commanded after they had received the Promise of the Father. But Stephen had proclaimed the same message of Christ and was now facing the same fate. Peter's mind had been enlightened by the Holy Spirit so that he could rightly interpret Joel and David in the light of Pentecost. "Songs:Stephen read the history of the Old Testament with new eyes in the light of the life and death of Jesus" (Furneaux).
rwp@Acts:9:22 @{Increased the more} (\mllon enedunamouto\). Imperfect passive indicative of \endunamo\, to receive power (late verb), progressive increase in strength as opposition grew. Saul's recantation stirred controversy and Saul grew in power. See also Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:4:13; strkjv@1Timothy:1:12; strkjv@2Timothy:2:1; strkjv@4:17; strkjv@Romans:4:20|. Christ, the dynamo of spiritual energy, was now pouring power (Acts:1:8|) into Paul who is already filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts:9:17|). {Confounded} (\sunechunnen\). Imperfect active indicative of \sunchunn\ (late form of \sunche\, to pour together, commingle, make confusion. The more Saul preached, the more the Jews were confused. {Proving} (\sunbibazn\). Present active participle of \sunbibaz\, old verb to make go together, to coalesce, to knit together. It is the very word that Luke will use in strkjv@16:10| of the conclusion reached at Troas concerning the vision of Paul. Here Saul took the various items in the life of Jesus of Nazareth and found in them the proof that he was in reality "the Messiah" (\ho Christos\). This method of argument Paul continued to use with the Jews (Acts:17:3|). It was irresistible argument and spread consternation among the Jews. It was the most powerful piece of artillery in the Jewish camp that was suddenly turned round upon them. It is probable that at this juncture Saul went into Arabia for several years (Galatians:1:12-24|). Luke makes no mention of this important event, but he leaves ample room for it at this point.
rwp@Acts:14:22 @{Confirming} (\epistrizontes\). Late verb (in LXX), in N.T. only in strkjv@Acts:14:22; strkjv@15:32,41|, to make more firm, to give additional (\epi\) strength. Each time in Acts the word is used concerning these churches. {To continue in the faith} (\emmenein ti pistei\). To remain in with locative, old verb. It is possible that \pistis\ here has the notion of creed as Paul uses it later (Colossians:1:23| with \epimen\; strkjv@1Timothy:5:8|). It seems to be here more than trust or belief. These recent converts from heathenism were ill-informed, were persecuted, had broken family and social ties, greatly needed encouragement if they were to hold out. {We must} (\dei hms\). It does not follow from this use of "we" that Luke was present, since it is a general proposition applying to all Christians at all times (2Timothy:3:12|). Luke, of course, approved this principle. Knowling asks why Timothy may not have told Luke about Paul's work. It all sounds like quotation of Paul's very language. Note the change of construction here after \parakalountes\ (infinitive of indirect command, \emmenein\, but \hoti dei\, indirect assertion). They needed the right understanding of persecution as we all do. Paul frankly warned these new converts in this heathen environment of the many tribulations through which they must enter the Kingdom of God (the culmination at last) as he did at Ephesus (Acts:20:20|) and as Jesus had done (John:16:33|). These saints were already converted.
rwp@Acts:15:19 @{Wherefore} (\dio\). "Because of which," this plain purpose of God as shown by Amos and Isaiah. {My judgment is} (\eg krin\). Note expression of \eg\. {I give my judgment}. (\Ego censeo\). James sums up the case as President of the Conference in a masterly fashion and with that consummate wisdom for which he is noted. It amounts to a resolution for the adoption by the assembly as happened (verse 33|). {That we trouble not} (\m parenochlein\). Present active infinitive with \m\ in an indirect command (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1046) of \parenochle\, a common late verb, occurring here alone in the N.T. This double compound (\para, en\) is from the old compound \enochle\ (\en\ and \ochlos\, crowd, annoyance) seen in strkjv@Luke:6:18; strkjv@Hebrews:12:15|, and means to cause trouble beside (\para\) one or in a matter. This is the general point of James which he explains further concerning "those who are turning from the Gentiles unto God," the very kind of people referred to in Amos.
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:15:32 @{Being themselves also prophets} (\kai autoi prophtai ontes\). As well as Paul and Barnabas and like Agabus (11:27-30|), for-speakers for Christ who justify the commendation in the letter (verse 27|) "with many words" (\dia logou pollou\), "with much talk," and no doubt with kindly words concerning the part played at the Conference by Paul and Barnabas. {Confirmed} (\epestrixan\). See on ¯14:22|. It was a glorious time with no Judaizers to disturb their fellowship as in 1-3|.
rwp@Acts:17:2 @{As his custom was} (\kata to eithos ti Pauli\). The same construction in strkjv@Luke:4:16| about Jesus in Nazareth (\kata to eithos auti\) with the second perfect active participle neuter singular from \eth\. Paul's habit was to go to the Jewish synagogue to use the Jews and the God-fearers as a springboard for his work among the Gentiles. {For three Sabbaths} (\epi sabbata tria\). Probably the reference is to the first three Sabbaths when Paul had a free hand in the synagogue as at first in Antioch in Pisidia. Luke does not say that Paul was in Thessalonica only three weeks. He may have spoken there also during the week, though the Sabbath was the great day. Paul makes it plain, as Furneaux shows, that he was in Thessalonica a much longer period than three weeks. The rest of the time he spoke, of course, outside of the synagogue. Paul implies an extended stay by his language in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:8|. The church consisted mainly of Gentile converts (2Thessalonians:3:4,7,8|) and seems to have been well organized (1Thessalonians:5:12|). He received help while there several times from Philippi (Phillipians:4:16|) and even so worked night and day to support himself (1Thessalonians:2:9|). His preaching was misunderstood there in spite of careful instruction concerning the second coming of Christ (1Thessalonians:4:13-5:5; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:1-12|). {Reasoned} (\dielexato\). First aorist middle indicative of \dialegomai\, old verb in the active to select, distinguish, then to revolve in the mind, to converse (interchange of ideas), then to teach in the Socratic ("dialectic") method of question and answer (cf. \dielegeto\ in verse 17|), then simply to discourse, but always with the idea of intellectual stimulus. With these Jews and God-fearers Paul appealed to the Scriptures as text and basis (\apo\) of his ideas.
rwp@Acts:21:21 @{They have been informed concerning thee} (\katchthsan peri sou\). First aorist passive indicative of \katche\. A word in the ancient Greek, but a few examples survive in the papyri. It means to sound (echo, from \ch\, our word) down (\kata\), to resound, re-echo, to teach orally. Oriental students today (Arabs learning the Koran) often study aloud. In the N.T. only in strkjv@Luke:1:4| which see; strkjv@Acts:18:25; strkjv@21:21; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:19; strkjv@Galatians:6:6; strkjv@Romans:2:18|. This oral teaching about Paul was done diligently by the Judaizers who had raised trouble against Peter (Acts:11:2|) and Paul (15:1,5|). They had failed in their attacks on Paul's world campaigns. Now they try to undermine him at home. In Paul's long absence from Jerusalem, since strkjv@18:22|, they have had a free hand, save what opposition James would give, and have had great success in prejudicing the Jerusalem Christians against Paul. Songs:James, in the presence of the other elders and probably at their suggestion, feels called upon to tell Paul the actual situation. {That thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses} (\hoti apostasian didaskeis apo Muses tous kata ta ethn pantas Ioudaious\). Two accusatives with \didaskeis\ (verb of teaching) according to rule. Literally, "That thou art teaching all the Jews among (\kata\) the Gentiles (the Jews of the dispersion as in strkjv@2:9|) apostasy from Moses." That is the point, the dreadful word \apostasian\ (our apostasy), a late form (I Macc. strkjv@2:15) for the earlier \apostasis\ (cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3| for \apostasia\). "In the eyes of the church at Jerusalem this was a far more serious matter than the previous question at the Conference about the status of Gentile converts" (Furneaux). Paul had brought that issue to the Jerusalem Conference because of the contention of the Judaizers. But here it is not the Judaizers, but the elders of the church with James as their spokesman on behalf of the church as a whole. They do not believe this false charge, but they wish Paul to set it straight. Paul had made his position clear in his Epistles (I Corinthians, Galatians, Romans) for all who cared to know. {Telling them not to circumcise their children} (\legn m peritemnein autous ta tekna\). The participle \legn\ agrees with "thou" (Paul), the subject of \didaskeis\. This is not indirect assertion, but indirect command, hence the negative \m\ instead of \ou\ with the infinitive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p.1046). The point is not that Paul stated what the Jewish Christians in the dispersion do, but that he says that they (\autous\ accusative of general reference) are not to go on circumcising (\peritemnein\, present active infinitive) their children. Paul taught the very opposite (1Corinthians:7:18|) and had Timothy circumcised (Acts:16:3|) because he was half Jew and half Greek. His own practice is stated in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:19| ("to the Jews as a Jew"). {Neither to walk after the customs} (\mde tois ethesin peripatein\). Locative case with infinitive \peripatein\. The charge was here enlarged to cover it all and to make Paul out an enemy of Jewish life and teachings. That same charge had been made against Stephen when young Saul (Paul) was the leader (6:14|): "Will change the customs (\eth\ the very word used here) which Moses delivered unto us." It actually seemed that some of the Jews cared more for Moses than for God (Acts:6:11|). Songs:much for the charge of the Judaizers.
rwp@Acts:22:4 @{And I} (\hos\). {I who}, literally. {This Way} (\tautn tn hodon\). The very term used for Christianity by Luke concerning Paul's persecution (9:2|), which see. Here it "avoids any irritating name for the Christian body" (Furneaux) by using this Jewish terminology. {Unto the death} (\achri thanatou\). Unto death, actual death of many as strkjv@26:10| shows. {Both men and women} (\andras te kai gunaikas\). Paul felt ashamed of this fact and it was undoubtedly in his mind when he pictured his former state as "a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious (1Timothy:1:13|), the first of sinners" (1Timothy:1:15|). But it showed the lengths to which Paul went in his zeal for Judaism.
rwp@Acts:23:29 @{Concerning questions of their law} (\peri ztmata tou nomou autn\). The very distinction drawn by Gallio in Corinth (Acts:18:14f.|). On the word see on strkjv@15:2|. {But to have nothing laid to his charge worthy of death or of bonds} (\mden de axion thanatou desmn echonta enklma\). Literally, "having no accusation (or crime) worthy of death or of bonds." This phrase here only in the N.T. \Egklma\ is old word for accusation or crime from \egkale\ used in verse 28| and in the N.T. only here and strkjv@25:16|. Lysias thus expresses the opinion that Paul ought to be set free and the lenient treatment that Paul received in Caesarea and Rome (first imprisonment) is probably due to this report of Lysias. Every Roman magistrate before whom Paul appears declares him innocent (Gallio, Lysias, Felix, Festus).
rwp@Acts:24:21 @{Except it be} (\e\). Literally, "than," but after interrogative \ti = ti allo\ "what else than." {For this one voice} (\peri mias tauts phns\). The normal Greek idiom with the attributive use of \houtos\ calls for the article before \mias\, though some inscriptions show it as here (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 702). {That} (\hs\). Genitive of the relative attracted to the case of the antecedent {phns}. {I cried} (\ekekraxa\). Reduplicated aorist as is usual with this verb in the LXX (Judges:3:15|). Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 348. {Touching} (\peri\). Concerning (around, about). {I am called in question} (\krinomai\). As in strkjv@23:6|. {Before you} (\eph' humn\). Same idiom as in verses 19,20|.
rwp@Acts:24:22 @{Having more exact knowledge} (\akribesteron eids\). "Knowing" (second perfect active participle of \oida\) "more accurately" (comparative of adverb \akribs\). More accurately than what? Than the Sanhedrin supposed he had "concerning the Way" (\ta peri ts hodou\, the things concerning the Way, common in Acts for Christianity). How Felix had gained this knowledge of Christianity is not stated. Philip the Evangelist lived here in Caesarea and there was a church also. Drusilla was a Jewess and may have told him something. Besides, it is wholly possible that Felix knew of the decision of Gallio in Corinth that Christianity was a _religio licita_ as a form of Judaism. As a Roman official he knew perfectly well that the Sanhedrin with the help of Tertullus had failed utterly to make out a case against Paul. He could have released Paul and probably would have done so but for fear of offending the Jews whose ruler he was and the hope that Paul (note "alms" in verse 17|) might offer him bribes for his liberty. {Deferred them} (\anebaleto autous\). Second aorist middle indicative of \anaball\, old verb (only here in N.T.) to throw or toss up, to put back or off, in middle to put off from one, to delay, to adjourn. Felix adjourned the case without a decision under a plausible pretext, that he required the presence of Lysias in person, which was not the case. Lysias had already said that Paul was innocent and was never summoned to Caesarea, so far as we know. Since Paul was a Roman citizen, Lysias could have thrown some light on the riot, if he had any. {Shall come down} (\katabi\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \katabain\. {I will determine your matter} (\diagnsomai ta kath' hums\). Future middle of \diaginsk\, old and common verb to know accurately or thoroughly (\dia\). In the N.T. only here (legal sense) and strkjv@23:15|. "The things according to you" (plural, the matters between Paul and the Sanhedrin).
rwp@Acts:24:25 @{Was terrified} (\emphobos genomenos\). Ingressive aorist middle of \ginomai\, "becoming terrified." \Emphobos\ (\en\ and \phobos\) old word, in the N.T. only strkjv@Luke:24:5; strkjv@Acts:10:5; strkjv@24:25; strkjv@Revelation:11:13|. Paul turned the tables completely around and expounded "the faith in Christ Jesus" as it applied to Felix and Drusilla and discoursed (\dialegomenou autou\, genitive absolute) concerning "righteousness" (\dikaiosuns\) which they did not possess, "self-control" or temperance (\egkrateias\) which they did not exhibit, and "the judgment to come" (\tou krimatos tou mellontos\) which was certain to overtake them. Felix was brought under conviction, but apparently not Drusilla. Like another Herodias her resentment was to be feared (Knowling). {Go thy way for this time} (\to nun echon poreuou\). The ancient Greek has this use of \to nun echon\ (Tobit strkjv@7:11) in the accusative of time, "as for the present or holding the now." {When I have a convenient season} (\kairon metalabn\). Second aorist active participle of the old verb \metalamban\, to find a share in, to obtain. It was his "excuse" for dodging the personal turn that Paul had given.
rwp@Acts:25:16 @{It is not the custom of the Romans} (\hoti ouk estin ethos Rmaiois\). If a direct quotation, \hoti\ is recitative as in Authorized Version. Canterbury Revision takes it as indirect discourse after \apekrithn\ (I answered), itself in a relative clause (\pros hous\) with the present tense (\estin\, is) preserved as is usual. There is a touch of disdain (Furneaux) in the tone of Festus. He may refer to a demand of the Jews before they asked that Paul be brought to Jerusalem (25:3|). At any rate there is a tone of scorn towards the Jews. {Before that the accused have} (\prin ho katgoroumenos echoi\). This use of the optative in this temporal clause with \prin \ instead of the subjunctive \an echi\ is in conformity with literary Greek and occurs only in Luke's writings in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 970). This sequence of modes is a mark of the literary style occasionally seen in Luke. It is interesting here to note the succession of dependent clauses in verses 14-16|. {The accusers face to face} (\kata prospon tous katgorous\). Same word \katgoros\ as in strkjv@23:30,35; strkjv@25:18|. This all sounds fair enough. {And have had opportunity to make his defence concerning the matter laid against him} (\topon te apologias laboi peri tou egklmatos\). Literally, "And should receive (\laboi\ optative for same reason as \echoi\ above, second aorist active of \lamban\) opportunity for defence (objective genitive) concerning the charge" (\egklmatos\ in N.T. only here and strkjv@23:19| which see).
rwp@Acts:25:19 @{But had} (\de eichon\). Descriptive imperfect active of \ech\ and \de\ of contrast (but). {Concerning their own religion} (\peri ts idias deisidaimonias\). See on ¯17:22| for discussion of this word. Festus would hardly mean "superstition," whatever he really thought, because Agrippa was a Jew. {And of one Jesus} (\kai peri tinos Isou\). This is the climax of supercilious scorn toward both Paul and "one Jesus." {Who was dead} (\tethnkotos\). Perfect active participle of \thnsk\ agreeing with \Isou\ (genitive). As being dead. {Whom Paul affirmed to be alive} (\hon ephasken ho Paulos zin\). Imperfect active of \phask\, old form of \phmi\ to say, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:24:9; strkjv@Romans:1:22|. Infinitive \zin\ in indirect discourse with \hon\ (whom) the accusative of general reference. With all his top-loftical airs Festus has here correctly stated the central point of Paul's preaching about Jesus as no longer dead, but living.
rwp@Acts:25:20 @{Being perplexed} (\aporoumenos\). Present middle participle of the common verb \apore\ (\a\ privative and \poros\ way), to be in doubt which way to turn, already in strkjv@Mark:6:20| which see and strkjv@Luke:24:4|. The Textus Receptus has \eis\ after here, but critical text has only the accusative which this verb allows (Mark:6:20|) as in Thucydides and Plato. {How to inquire concerning these things} (\tn peri toutn ztsin\). Literally, "as to the inquiry concerning these things." This is not the reason given by Luke in verse 9| (wanting to curry favour with the Jews), but doubtless this motive also actuated Festus as both could be true. {Whether he would go to Jerusalem} (\ei bouloito poreuesthai eis Ierosoluma\). Optative in indirect question after \elegon\ (asked or said) imperfect active, though the present indicative could have been retained with change of person: "Dost thou wish, etc.," (\ei bouli\, etc.). See Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1031, 1044. This is the question put to Paul in verse 9| though \theleis\ is there used.
rwp@Acts:26:1 @{Thou art permitted} (\epitrepetai soi\). Literally, It is permitted thee. As if Agrippa were master of ceremonies instead of Festus. Agrippa as a king and guest presides at the grand display while Festus has simply introduced Paul. {For thyself} (\huper seautou\). Some MSS. have \peri\ (concerning). Paul is allowed to speak in his own behalf. No charges are made against him. In fact, Festus has admitted that he has no real proof of any charges. {Stretched forth his hand} (\ekteinas tn cheira\). Dramatic oratorical gesture (not for silence as in strkjv@12:17; strkjv@13:16|) with the chain still upon it (verse 29|) linking him to the guard. First aorist active participle of \ektein\, to stretch out. {Made his defence} (\apelogeito\). Inchoative imperfect of \apologeomai\ (middle), "began to make his defence." This is the fullest of all Paul's defences. He has no word of censure of his enemies or of resentment, but seizes the opportunity to preach Christ to such a distinguished company which he does with "singular dignity" (Furneaux). He is now bearing the name of Christ "before kings" (Acts:9:15|). In general Paul follows the line of argument of the speech on the stairs (chapter strkjv@Acts:22|).
rwp@Acts:28:15 @{When they heard of us} (\akousantes ta peri hmn\). How "they heard the things concerning us" we do not know. Good news had its way of travel even before the days of telegraph, telephone, daily papers. Possibly Julius had to send on special couriers with news of his arrival after the shipwreck. Possibly some of the brethren in Puteoli at once (beginning of the week) sent on news to the brethren in Rome. The church in Rome had long ago received Paul's letter from Corinth at the hands of Phoebe. {To meet us} (\eis apantsin hmin\). Idiomatic phrase, "for meeting with us" (associative instrumental case). _Koin_ word \apantsis\ from verb \apanta\, to meet, in N.T. only here; strkjv@Matthew:25:6; strkjv@1Timothy:4:17|. Use after \eis\ rather than infinitive like a translation Hebraism (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 91). {As far as the Market of Appius} (\achri Appiou Phorou\). The Forum of Appius, 90 miles from Puteoli, 40 from Rome, on the great Appian Way. The Censor Appius Claudius had constructed this part of the road, B.C. 312. Paul probably struck the Appian Way at Capua. Portions of this great stone highway are still in use. If one wishes to tread where Paul trod, he can do it here. Appii Forum had a bad reputation, the haunt of thieves, thugs, and swindlers. What would this motley crowd think of Paul chained to a soldier? {Three Taverns} (\Trin Tabernn\). Genitive case after \achri\ like \Appiou Phorou\. About 30 miles from Rome. _Tres Tabernae_. {Whom} (\hous\). Two groups of the disciples came (one Gentile, one Jewish, Rackham thinks), one to Appii Forum, the other to Three Taverns. It was a joyous time and Julius would not interfere. {Took courage} (\elabe tharsos\). The old substantive \tharsos\ is here alone in the N.T. Jesus himself had exhorted Paul to be of good courage (\tharsei\ strkjv@Acts:23:11|) as he had done the disciples (John:16:33|). Paul had passed through enough to cause depression, whether he was depressed or not, but he deeply appreciated this kindly sympathy.
rwp@Acts:28:22 @{But we desire} (\axioumen de\). Old verb \axio\, to deem worthy, to think right or proper as in strkjv@15:38| which see. They think it only fair to hear Paul's side of his case. {Concerning this sect} (\peri ts haireses tauts\). Paul had identified Christianity with Judaism (verse 20|) in its Messianic hope. The language seems to imply that the number of Christians in Rome was comparatively small and mainly Gentile. If the edict of Claudius for the expulsion of the Jews from Rome (Acts:18:2|) was due to disturbance over Christ (\Chrstus\), then even in Rome the Jews had special reason for hostility towards Christians. {Everywhere spoken against} (\pantachou antilegetai\). Cf. verse 19|. The line of cleavage between Jew and Christian was now sharply drawn everywhere.
rwp@Acts:28:23 @{Appointed} (\taxamenoi\). First aorist middle participle of \tass\. Formal arrangement as in strkjv@Matthew:28:16| when Jesus appointed the mountain for his meeting in Galilee. {In great number} (\pleiones\). Comparative of \polus\, "more than a few." {Expounded} (\exetitheto\). Imperfect middle of \ektithmi\, to set forth, as in strkjv@11:4; strkjv@18:26|. He did it with detail and care and spent all day at it, "from morning till evening" (\apo pri hes hesperas\). In N.T. only here, strkjv@4:3| and strkjv@Luke:24:29|, though common word. {Persuading them concerning Jesus} (\peithn autous peri tou Isou\). Conative present active participle, trying to persuade. It was only about Jesus that he could make good his claim concerning the hope of Israel (verse 20|). It was Paul's great opportunity. Songs:he appealed both to Moses and to the prophets for proof as it was his custom to do.
rwp@Info_Colossians @ PURPOSE OF THE EPISTLE Epaphras did not come in vain, for Paul was tremendously stirred by the peril to Christianity from the Gnostics (\hoi gnstikoi\, the knowing ones). He had won his fight for freedom in Christ against the Judaizers who tried to fasten Jewish sacramentarianism upon spiritual Christianity. Now there is an equal danger of the dissipation of vital Christianity in philosophic speculation. In particular, the peril was keen concerning the Person of Christ when the Gnostics embraced Christianity and applied their theory of the universe to him. They split into factions on the subject of Christ. The Docetic (from \doke\, to seem) Gnostics held that Jesus did not have a real human body, but only a phantom body. He was, in fact, an aeon and had no real humanity. The Cerinthian (followers of Cerinthus) Gnostics admitted the humanity of the man Jesus, but claimed that the Christ was an aeon that came on Jesus at his baptism in the form of a dove and left him on the Cross so that only the man Jesus died. At once this heresy sharpened the issue concerning the Person of Christ already set forth in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. Paul met the issue squarely and powerfully portrayed his full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Son of Man (both deity and humanity) in opposition to both types of Gnostics. Songs:then Colossians seems written expressly for our own day when so many are trying to rob Jesus Christ of his deity. The Gnostics took varying views of moral issues also as men do now. There were the ascetics with rigorous rules and the licentious element that let down all the bars for the flesh while the spirit communed with God. One cannot understand Colossians without some knowledge of Gnosticism such as may be obtained in such books as Angus's _The Mystery-Religions and Christianity_, Glover's _The Conflict of Religion in the Early Roman Empire_, Kennedy's St. _Paul and the Mystery-Religions_, Lightfoot's _Commentary on Colossians_.
rwp@Colossians:1:2 @{At Colossae} (\en Kolossais\). The spelling is uncertain, the MSS. differing in the title (\Kolassaeis\) and here (\Kolossais\). Colossae was a city of Phrygia on the Lycus, the tributaries of which brought a calcareous deposit of a peculiar kind that choked up the streams and made arches and fantastic grottoes. In spite of this there was much fertility in the valley with two other prosperous cities some ten or twelve miles away (Hierapolis and Laodicea). "The church at Colossae was the least important of any to which Paul's epistles were addressed" (Vincent). But he had no greater message for any church than he here gives concerning the Person of Christ. There is no more important message today for modern men.
rwp@Colossians:1:16 @{All things} (\ta panta\). The universe as in strkjv@Romans:11:35|, a well-known philosophical phrase. It is repeated at the end of the verse. {In him were created} (\en auti ektisth\). Paul now gives the reason (\hoti\, for) for the primacy of Christ in the work of creation (16f.|). It is the constative aorist passive indicative \ektisth\ (from \ktiz\, old verb, to found, to create (Romans:1:25|). This central activity of Christ in the work of creation is presented also in strkjv@John:1:3; strkjv@Hebrews:1:2| and is a complete denial of the Gnostic philosophy. The whole of creative activity is summed up in Christ including the angels in heaven and everything on earth. God wrought through "the Son of his love." All earthly dignities are included. {Have been created} (\ektistai\). Perfect passive indicative of \ktiz\, "stand created," "remain created." The permanence of the universe rests, then, on Christ far more than on gravity. It is a Christo-centric universe. {Through him} (\di' autou\). As the intermediate and sustaining agent. He had already used \en auti\ (in him) as the sphere of activity. {And unto him} (\kai eis auton\). This is the only remaining step to take and Paul takes it (1Corinthians:15:28|) See strkjv@Ephesians:1:10| for similar use of \en auti\ of Christ and in strkjv@Colossians:1:19; 20| again we have \en auti, di' autou, eis auton\ used of Christ. See strkjv@Hebrews:2:10| for \di' hon\ (because of whom) and \di' hou\ (by means of whom) applied to God concerning the universe (\ta panta\). In strkjv@Romans:11:35| we find \ex autou kai di' autou kai eis auton ta panta\ referring to God. But Paul does not use \ex\ in this connection of Christ, but only \en\, \dia\, and \eis\. See the same distinction preserved in strkjv@1Corinthians:8:6| (\ex\ of God, \dia\, of Christ).
rwp@Colossians:2:11 @{Ye were also circumcised} (\kai perietmthte\). First aorist passive indicative of \peritemn\, to circumcise. But used here as a metaphor in a spiritual sense as in strkjv@Romans:2:29| "the circumcision of the heart." {Not made with hands} (\acheiropoiti\). This late and rare negative compound verbal occurs only in the N.T. (Mark:14:58; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1; strkjv@Colossians:2:11|) by merely adding \a\ privative to the old verbal \cheiropoitos\ (Acts:7:48; strkjv@Ephesians:2:11|), possibly first in strkjv@Mark:14:58| where both words occur concerning the temple. In strkjv@2Corinthians:5:1| the reference is to the resurrection body. The feminine form of this compound adjective is the same as the masculine. {In the putting off} (\en ti apekdusei\). As if an old garment (the fleshly body). From \apekduomai\ (Colossians:2:15|, possibly also coined by Paul) and occurring nowhere else so far as known. The word is made in a perfectly normal way by the perfective use of the two Greek prepositions (\apo, ek\), "a resource available for and generally used by any real thinker writing Greek" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). Paul had as much right to mint a Greek compound as any one and surely no one ever had more ideas to express and more power in doing it. {Of Christ} (\tou Christou\). Specifying genitive, the kind of circumcision that belongs to Christ, that of the heart.
rwp@Colossians:4:8 @{I have sent} (\epempsa\). Epistolary aorist active indicative of \pemp\ as in strkjv@Ephesians:6:22|. {That ye may know} (\hina gnte\). Second aorist (ingressive) active subjunctive of \ginsk\, "that ye may come to know." This the correct text, not \gni\ (third singular). {Our estate} (\ta peri hmn\). "The things concerning us." {May comfort} (\parakalesi\). First aorist active subjunctive. Proper rendering here and not "may exhort."
rwp@Ephesians:1:4 @{Even as he chose us in him} (\kaths exelexato hms en auti\). First aorist middle indicative of \ekleg\, to pick out, to choose. Definitive statement of God's elective grace concerning believers in Christ. {Before the foundation of the world} (\pro katabols kosmou\). Old word from \kataball\, to fling down, used of the deposit of seed, the laying of a foundation. This very phrase with \pro\ in the Prayer of Jesus (John:17:24|) of love of the Father toward the Son. It occurs also in strkjv@1Peter:1:20|. Elsewhere we have \apo\ (from) used with it (Matthew:25:34; strkjv@Luke:11:50; strkjv@Hebrews:4:3; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@Revelation:13:8; strkjv@17:8|). But Paul uses neither phrase elsewhere, though he has \apo tn ainn\ (from the ages) in strkjv@Ephesians:3:9|. Here in strkjv@Ephesians:1:3-14|. Paul in summary fashion gives an outline of his view of God's redemptive plans for the race. {That we should be} (\einai hms\). Infinitive of purpose with the accusative of general reference (\hms\). See strkjv@Colossians:1:22| for the same two adjectives and also \katenpion autou\.
rwp@Ephesians:6:22 @{That ye may know} (\hina gnte\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \ginsk\. Just as in strkjv@Colossians:4:8| he had not written \hina eidte\ in verse 21|. {Our state} (\ta peri hmn\). "The things concerning us," practically the same as \ta kat' eme\ of verse 21|. See both phrases in strkjv@Colossians:4:7,8|.
rwp@Info_Epistles-General @ ORDER AND DATES The oldest Greek manuscripts give these General Epistles immediately after the Acts, and Westcott and Hort so print them in their Greek New Testament. But the English Versions follow the Textus Receptus and put them just before the Apocalypse. The order of the seven letters varies greatly in the different manuscripts, though usually James comes first and Jude:last (as the last accepted and the least known of the four authors). It is possible that the order of James, Peter, and John (omitting Jude) represented a sort of chronological precedence in some minds. It is possible also that no importance is to be attached to this order. Certainly John wrote last and after the destruction of Jerusalem, while the others come before that great event if they are genuine, as I believe, though there are difficulties of a serious nature concerning II Peter. James may be very early. If so, these seven Epistles are scattered all the way from A.D. 45 to 90. They have no connection with one another save in the case of the Epistles of Peter and Jude.
rwp@Info_Epistles-General @ IMPORTANCE OF THE GENERAL EPISTLES Without them we should be deprived of much concerning three outstanding personalities in early Christianity. We should know much less of "James, and Cephas, and John, they who were reputed to be pillars" (Galatians:2:9|). We should know less also of the Judaic (not Judaizing) form of Christianity seen in the Epistles of James and Jude:in contrast with, though not opposed to, the Pauline type. In Peter's Epistles we see, indeed, a mediating position without compromise of principle, for Peter in the Jerusalem Conference loyally supported Paul and Barnabas even if he did flicker for a moment later in Antioch. In the Johannine Epistles we see the great Eagle soar as in his Gospel in calm serenity in spite of conflict with the Gnostics who struck at the very life of Christianity itself. "The only opposition which remains worthy of a Christian's consideration is that between light and darkness, truth and falsehood, love and hate, God and the world, Christ and Antichrist, life and death" (Plummer). Songs:we can be grateful for the preservation of these little Epistles which reveal differences in the development of the great Christian leaders and the adaptation of the gospel message to changing world conditions then and now. Info_Epistles-Pastorial
rwp@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ THE FOURTH GROUP THE PASTORAL EPISTLES FIRST TIMOTHY TITUS SECOND TIMOTHY A.D. 65 TO 68 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It is necessary to discuss introductory matters concerning the three because they are common to them all. It is true that some modern scholars admit as Pauline the personal passages in strkjv@2Timothy:1:15-18; strkjv@4:9-22| while they deny the genuineness of the rest. But that criticism falls by its own weight since precisely the same stylistic characteristics appear in these admitted passages as in the rest and no earthly reason can be advanced for Paul's writing mere scraps or for the omission of the other portions and the preservation of these by a second century forger.
rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ The study of Paul's Epistles in the order of their writing is the best possible way of seeing his own growth as a theologian and interpreter of Christ. Sabatier long ago laid emphasis on this point in his book _The Apostle Paul_ as did Matheson in _The Spiritual Development of Paul_. It is a tragedy to have to read Paul's Epistles as printed in the usual Greek text of Westcott and Hort and the English translations, beginning with Romans and ending with Philemon. In the manuscripts that give Paul's Epistles Romans comes first as the largest and most important, but Titus and Philemon come after II Timothy (the last just before his death). We know something of Paul's early preaching how he laid emphasis on the Messiahship of Jesus proven by his resurrection, Paul himself having seen the Risen Christ (Acts:9:22|). This conviction and experience lay at the foundation of all his work and he never faltered concerning it (Acts:17:3). In the earliest sermon of which we have a full report Paul proclaims justification by faith in Christ with forgiveness of sins (Acts:13:38f.|), blessings not obtained by the law of Moses. In the unfolding life of Paul he grappled with great problems of Jewish rabbinism and Greek philosophy and mystery-religions and Paul himself grew in stature as he courageously and victoriously faced Judaizer and Gnostic. There are scholars who claim that Paul surrendered to the appeal of Gnostic sacramentarianism and so went back on his great doctrine of justification by faith, not by works. It will be shown at the proper time that this view misinterprets Paul's attitude. The events given by Luke in the Acts fit in with the self-revelation of Paul in his own Epistles as we read them. Each one of the four groups of Epistles has a slightly different style and vocabulary as is natural when one comes to think of it. The same thing is true of the plays of Shakespeare and the poems of Milton. Style is the man, Buffon says. Yes, but style is also a function of the subject. Particularly is this true of vocabulary which has to vary with the different topics treated. But style in the same man varies with different ages. Ripened old age mellows the exuberance of youth and the passionate vehemence of manhood. We shall see Paul himself in his Epistles, letting himself go in various ways and in different moods. But in all the changing phases of his life and work there is the same masterful man who glories in being the slave of Jesus Christ and the Apostle to the Gentiles. The passion of Paul is Christ and one can feel the throb of the heart of the chief of sinners who became the chief of saints in all his Epistles. There is the Pauline glow and glory in them all.
rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ SOME BOOKS ON THE PAULINE EPISTLES Bate, _As a Whole Guide to the Epistles of St. Paul_ (1927). Bonnet-Schroeder, _Epitres de Paul_ (4 ed. 1912). Champlain, _The Epistles of Paul_ (1906). Clemen, _Einheitlichkeit d. paul. Briefe_ (1894). Conybeare and Howson, _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_. Drummond, _The Epistles of Paul the Apostle_ (1899). Hayes, _Paul and His Epistles_ (1915). Heinrici, _Die Forschungen uber die paul. Briefe_ (1886). Lake, _The Earlier Epistles of St. Paul_ (1915). Lewin, _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_. (1875). Neil, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1906). Scott, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1909). Shaw, _The Pauline Epistles_ (1903). Vischer, _Die Paulusbriefe_ (1910). Voelter, _Die Composition der paul. Haupt Briefe_ (1890). Voelter, _Paulus und seine Briefe_ (1905). Way, _The Letters of Paul to Seven Churches and Three Friends_ (1906) Weinel, _Die Echtheit der paul. Hauptbriefe_ (1920). Weiss, B., _Present Status of the Inquiry Concerning the Genuineness of the Pauline Epistles_ (1901). Weiss, B., _Die Paulinische Briefe_ (1902). Wood, _Life, Letters, and Religion of St. Paul_ (1925). strkjv@Galatians:1:1 @{Not from men, neither through men} (\ouk ap' anthrpn oude di' anthrpou\). The bluntness of Paul's denial is due to the charge made by the Judaizers that Paul was not a genuine apostle because not one of the twelve. This charge had been made in Corinth and called forth the keenest irony of Paul (2Corinthians:10-12|). In strkjv@Galatians:1; 2| Paul proves his independence of the twelve and his equality with them as recognized by them. Paul denies that his apostleship had a human source (\ouk ap' anthrpn\) and that it had come to him through (\di' anthrpou\) a human channel (Burton). {But through Jesus Christ and God the Father} (\alla dia Isou Christou kai theou patros\). The call to be an apostle came to Paul through Jesus Christ as he claimed in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:1| and as told in strkjv@Acts:9:4-6; strkjv@22:7ff.; strkjv@26:16ff|. He is apostle also by the will of God. {Who raised him from the dead} (\tou egeirantos auton ek nekrn\). And therefore Paul was qualified to be an apostle since he had seen the Risen Christ (1Corinthians:9:1; strkjv@15:8f.|). This verb \egeir\ is often used in N.T. for raising from the sleep of death, to wake up the dead.
rwp@Galatians:1:4 @{For our sins} (\huper tn hamartin\). Some MSS. have \peri\ (concerning). In the _Koin_ this use of \huper\ as like \peri\ has come to be common. He refers to the death of Christ (cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:15:3; strkjv@Galatians:2:20; strkjv@Romans:5:6f.|). As a rule \peri\ occurs of things, \huper\ of persons. {Deliver} (\exeltai\). Second aorist middle subjunctive (final clause with \hops\) of \exaire\, old verb to pluck out, to rescue (Acts:23:27|). "Strikes the keynote of the epistle. The gospel is a rescue, an emancipation from a state of bondage" (Lightfoot). {Out of this present evil world} (\ek tou ainos tou enesttos ponrou\). Literally, "out of the age the existing one being evil." The predicate position of \ponrou\ calls emphatic attention to it. Each word here is of interest and has been already discussed. See on ¯Matthew:13:22| for \ain\, strkjv@Matthew:6:23| for \ponros\. \Enesttos\ is genitive masculine singular of \enests\ second perfect (intransitive) participle of \enistmi\ for which see on ¯2Thessalonians:2:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:22; strkjv@7:26|. It is present as related to future (Romans:8:38; strkjv@Hebrews:9:9|). {According to the will of God} (\kata to thelma tou theou\). Not according to any merit in us.
rwp@Galatians:1:12 @{Nor was I taught it} (\oute edidachthn\). He did not receive it "from man" (\para anthrpn\, which shuts out both \apo\ and \dia\ of verse 1|), whether Peter or any other apostle, nor was he taught it in the school of Gamaliel in Jerusalem or at the University of Tarsus. He "received" his gospel in one way, "through revelation of Jesus Christ" (\di' apokalupses Isou Christou\). He used \parelabon\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:3| about the reception of his message from Christ. It is not necessary to say that he had only one (because of the aorist active \parelabon\, from \paralamban\, for it can very well be constative aorist) revelation (unveiling) from Christ. In fact, we know that he had numerous visions of Christ and in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:23| he expressly says concerning the origin of the Lord's Supper: "I received (\parelabon\, again) from the Lord." The Lord Jesus revealed his will to Paul.
rwp@Galatians:6:14 @{Far be it from me} (\emoi m genoito\). Second aorist middle optative of \ginomai\ in a negative (\m\) wish about the future with dative case: "May it not happen to me." See strkjv@2:17|. The infinitive \kauchsthai\ (to glory) is the subject of \genoito\ as is common in the LXX, though not elsewhere in the N.T. {Hath been crucified unto me} (\emoi estaurtai\). Perfect passive indicative of \stauro\, stands crucified, with the ethical dative again (\emoi\). This is one of the great sayings of Paul concerning his relation to Christ and the world in contrast with the Judaizers. Cf. strkjv@2:19f.; strkjv@3:13; strkjv@4:4f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:23f.; strkjv@Romans:1:16; strkjv@3:21ff.; strkjv@4:25; strkjv@5:18|. {World} (\kosmos\) has no article, but is definite as in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:19|. Paul's old world of Jewish descent and environment is dead to him (Phillipians:3:3f.|).
rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE PICTURE OF CHRIST At once we are challenged by the bold stand taken by the author concerning the Person of Christ as superior to the prophets of the Old Testament because he is the Son of God through whom God has spoken in the new dispensation (Hebrews:1:1-3|), this Son who is God's Agent in the work of creation and of grace as we see it stated in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11; strkjv@Colossians:1:13-20; strkjv@John:1:1-18|. This high doctrine of Jesus as God's Son with the glory and stamp of God's nature is never lowered, for as God's Son he is superior to angels (Hebrews:1:4-2:4|), though the humanity of Jesus is recognized as one proof of the glory of Jesus (Hebrews:2:5-18|). Jesus is shown to be superior to Moses as God's Son over God's house (Hebrews:3:1-4:13|), But the chief portion of the Epistle is devoted to the superiority of Jesus Christ as priest to the work of Aaron and the whole Levitical line (Hebrews:4:14-12:3|). Here the author with consummate skill, though with rabbinical refinements at times, shows that Jesus is like Melchizedek and so superior to Aaron (Hebrews:4:14-7:28|), works under a better covenant of grace (Hebrews:8:1-13|), works in a better sanctuary which is in heaven (Hebrews:9:1-12|), offers a better sacrifice which is his own blood (Hebrews:9:13-10:18|), and gives us better promises for the fulfilment of his task (Hebrews:10:19-12:3|). Hence this Epistle deserves to be called the Epistle of the Priesthood of Christ. Songs:W. P. Du Bose calls his exposition of the book, _High Priesthood and Sacrifice_ (1908). This conception of Christ as our Priest who offered himself on the Cross and as our Advocate with the Father runs all through the New Testament (Mark:10:46; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@John:10:17; strkjv@Matthew:26:28; strkjv@Romans:8:32; strkjv@1Peter:1:18f.; strkjv@1John:2:1f.; strkjv@Revelation:5:9|, etc.). But it is in Hebrews that we have the full-length portrait of Jesus Christ as our Priest and Redeemer. The Glory of Jesus runs through the whole book.
rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE DATE Here again modern scholars differ widely. Westcott places it between A.D. 64 and 67. Harnack and Holtzmann prefer a date between 81 and 96. Marcus Dods argues strongly that the Epistle was written while the temple was still standing. If it was already destroyed, it is hard to understand how the author could have written strkjv@Hebrews:10:1f.|: "Else would they not have ceased to be offered?" And in strkjv@Hebrews:8:13| "nigh to vanishing away" (\eggus aphanismou\) is only intelligible with the temple service still going on. The author makes use of the tabernacle instead of the temple because the temple was patterned after the tabernacle. On the other hand, the mention of Timothy in strkjv@Hebrews:13:23| as being "set free" (\apolelumenon\) raises an inquiry concerning Paul's last plea to Timothy to come to him in Rome (2Timothy:4:11-13|). Apparently Timothy came and was put in prison. If so, since Paul was put to death before Nero's own death (June 8, A.D. 68), there is left only the years 67 to 69 A.D. as probable or even possible. It is thus the last of the New Testament books before the Johannine Writings all of which come towards the close of the century and after the destruction of Jerusalem.
rwp@Hebrews:5:11 @{Of whom} (\peri hou\). Or "concerning which," for \hou\ can be either masculine or neuter (genitive). It is the likeness of Jesus as high priest to Melchizedek that the author has in mind. He is ready to discuss that but for the fear that the reader may fail to grasp his meaning, for he will run counter to the usual Jewish ideas. Hence he pauses to stir up the interest of the readers (5:11-6:20|) before going on with the argument (7:1-28|). {Hard of interpretation} (\dusermneutos\). Late and rare verbal compound (\dus, hermneu\), in Diodorus and Philo, here only in N.T. Hard to explain because of the strange (to Jews) line taken, but still more because of their dulness. {Dull of hearing} (\nthroi tais akoais\). Old adjective (papyri also), from negative \n\ and \the\, to push, no push in the hearing, slow and sluggish in mind as well as in the ears. In N.T. only here and strkjv@6:12| (slack, sluggish). Plato calls some students \nthroi\ (stupid).
rwp@Hebrews:10:6 @{Thou hadst no pleasure} (\ouk eudoksas\). First aorist active indicative of \eudoke\, common for God's good pleasure (Matthew:3:17|). God took no pleasure in the animal offering (\thusian\), the meal-offering (\prosphoran\), the burnt-offering (\holokautmata\), the sin-offering (\peri hamartias\, concerning sin).
rwp@Hebrews:10:18 @{There is no more offering for sin} (\ouketi prosphora peri hamartias\). This is the logical and triumphant conclusion concerning the better sacrifice offered by Christ (9:13-10:18|). As Jeremiah had prophesied, there is actually remission (\aphesis\, removal) of sins. Repetition of the sacrifice is needless.
rwp@Hebrews:10:19 @{Having therefore} (\echontes oun\). The author now gives a second (the first in strkjv@8:1-6|) resum of the five arguments concerning the superior priestly work of Christ (10:19-25|) coupled with an earnest exhortation like that in strkjv@4:14-16|, with which he began the discussion, before he proceeds to treat at length the fifth and last one, the better promises in Christ (10:26-12:3|). {Boldness} (\parrsian\). This is the dominant note all through the Epistle (3:6; strkjv@4:16; strkjv@10:19,35|). They were tempted to give up Christ, to be quitters. Boldness (courage) is the need of the hour. {Into the holy place} (\tn hagin\). That is, the heavenly sanctuary where Jesus is (6:18-20|). This is the better sanctuary (9:1-12|). {By the blood of Jesus} (\en ti haimati Isou\). This is the better sacrifice just discussed (9:13-10:18|).
rwp@Hebrews:11:20 @{Even concerning things to come} (\kai peri mellontn\). As told in strkjv@Genesis:27:28-40| when Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau.
rwp@Hebrews:11:22 @{When his end was nigh} (\teleutn\). Present active participle of \teleuta\, to finish or close (Matthew:2:19|), "finishing his life." {Of the departure} (\peri ts exodou\). Late compound for way out, exit as here, metaphorically of death as here (Luke:9:31; strkjv@2Peter:1:15|). {Concerning his bones} (\peri tn osten autou\). Uncontracted form as in strkjv@Matthew:23:27|.
rwp@Info_John @ THE FOURTH GOSPEL BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION GREATEST OF BOOKS The test of time has given the palm to the Fourth Gospel over all the books of the world. If Luke's Gospel is the most beautiful, John's Gospel is supreme in its height and depth and reach of thought. The picture of Christ here given is the one that has captured the mind and heart of mankind. It is not possible for a believer in Jesus Christ as the Son of God to be indifferent to modern critical views concerning the authorship and historical value of this Holy of Holies of the New Testament. Here we find _The Heart of Christ_ (E. H. Sears), especially in chapters strkjv@John:14-17|. If Jesus did not do or say these things, it is small consolation to be told that the book at least has symbolic and artistic value for the believer. The language of the Fourth Gospel has the clarity of a spring, but we are not able to sound the bottom of the depths. Lucidity and profundity challenge and charm us as we linger over it.
rwp@Info_John @ 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 @ 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:1:7 @{For witness} (\eis marturian\). Old word from \marture\ (from \martus\), both more common in John's writings than the rest of the N.T. This the purpose of the Baptist's ministry. {That he might bear witness} (\hina martursi\). Final clause with \hina\ and aorist active subjunctive of \marture\ to make clearer \eis marturian\. {Of the light} (\peri tou phtos\). "Concerning the light." The light was shining and men with blinded eyes were not seeing the light (John:1:26|), blinded by the god of this world still (2Corinthians:4:4|). John had his own eyes opened so that he saw and told what he saw. That is the mission of every preacher of Christ. But he must first have his own eyes opened. {That all might believe} (\hina pisteussin\). Final clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \pisteu\, ingressive aorist "come to believe." This is one of John's great words (about 100 times), "with nine times the frequency with which it is used by the Synoptists" (Bernard). And yet \pistis\, so common in Paul, John uses only in strkjv@1John:5:4| and four times in the Apocalypse where \pisteu\ does not occur at all. Here it is used absolutely as in strkjv@John:1:50|, etc. {Through him} (\di' autou\). As the intermediate agent in winning men to believe in Christ (the Logos) as the Light and the Life of men. This is likewise the purpose of the author of this book (21:31|). The preacher is merely the herald to point men to Christ.
rwp@John:1:19 @{And this is the witness of John} (\kai haut estin h marturia tou Ianou\). He had twice already alluded to it (verses 7f., 15|) and now he proceeds to give it as the most important item to add after the Prologue. Just as the author assumes the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke, so he assumes the Synoptic accounts of the baptism of Jesus by John, but adds various details of great interest and value between the baptism and the Galilean ministry, filling out thus our knowledge of this first year of the Lord's ministry in various parts of Palestine. The story in John proceeds along the same lines as in the Synoptics. There is increasing unfolding of Christ to the disciples with increasing hostility on the part of the Jews till the final consummation in Jerusalem. {When the Jews sent unto him} (\hote apesteilan pros auton hoi Ioudaioi\). John, writing in Ephesus near the close of the first century long after the destruction of Jerusalem, constantly uses the phrase "the Jews" as descriptive of the people as distinct from the Gentile world and from the followers of Christ (at first Jews also). Often he uses it of the Jewish leaders and rulers in particular who soon took a hostile attitude toward both John and Jesus. Here it is the Jews from Jerusalem who sent (\apesteilan\, first aorist active indicative of \apostell\). {Priests and Levites} (\hiereis kai Leueitas\). Sadducees these were. Down below in verse 24| the author explains that it was the Pharisees who sent the Sadducees. The Synoptics throw a flood of light on this circumstance, for in strkjv@Matthew:3:7| we are told that the Baptist called the Pharisees and Sadducees "offspring of vipers" (Luke:3:7|). Popular interest in John grew till people were wondering "in their hearts concerning John whether haply he were the Christ" (Luke:3:15|). Songs:the Sanhedrin finally sent a committee to John to get his own view of himself, but the Pharisees saw to it that Sadducees were sent. {To ask him} (\hina ertssin auton\). Final \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \erta\, old verb to ask a question as here and often in the _Koin_ to ask for something (John:14:16|) like \aite\. {Who art thou?} (\su tis ei;\). Direct question preserved and note proleptic position of \su\, "Thou, who art thou?" The committee from the Sanhedrin put the question sharply up to John to define his claims concerning the Messiah.
rwp@John:1:29 @{On the morrow} (\ti epaurion\). Locative case with \hmri\ (day) understood after the adverb \epaurion\. "Second day of this spiritual diary" (Bernard) from verse 19|. {Seeth Jesus coming} (\blepei ton Isoun erchomenon\). Dramatic historical present indicative (\blepei\) with vivid present middle participle (\erchomenon\). Graphic picture. {Behold the Lamb of God} (\ide ho amnos tou theou\). Exclamation \ide\ like \idou\, not verb, and so nominative \amnos\. Common idiom in John (1:36; strkjv@3:26|, etc.). For "the Lamb of God" see strkjv@1Corinthians:5:7| (cf. strkjv@John:19:36|) and strkjv@1Peter:1:19|. The passage in strkjv@Isaiah:53:6f.| is directly applied to Christ by Philip in strkjv@Acts:8:32|. See also strkjv@Matthew:8:17; strkjv@1Peter:2:22f.; strkjv@Hebrews:9:28|. But the Jews did not look for a suffering Messiah (John:12:34|) nor did the disciples at first (Mark:9:32; strkjv@Luke:24:21|). But was it not possible for John, the Forerunner of the Messiah, to have a prophetic insight concerning the Messiah as the Paschal Lamb, already in strkjv@Isaiah:53|, even if the rabbis did not see it there? Symeon had it dimly (Luke:2:35|), but John more clearly. Songs:Westcott rightly. Bernard is unwilling to believe that John the Baptist had more insight on this point than current Judaism. Then why and how did he recognize Jesus as Messiah at all? Certainly the Baptist did not have to be as ignorant as the rabbis. {Which taketh away the sin of the world} (\ho airn tn hamartian tou kosmou\). Note singular \hamartian\ not plural \hamartias\ (1John:3:5|) where same verb \air\, to bear away, is used. The future work of the Lamb of God here described in present tense as in strkjv@1John:1:7| about the blood of Christ. He is the Lamb of God for the world, not just for Jews.
rwp@John:2:25 @{And because he needed not} (\kai hoti chreian eichen\). Imperfect active, "and because he did not have need." {That any one should bear witness concerning man} (\hina tis martursi peri tou anthrpou\). Non-final use of \hina\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \marture\ and the generic article (\peri tou anthrpou\) concerning mankind as in the next clause also. {For he himself knew} (\autos gar eginsken\). Imperfect active, "for he himself kept on knowing" as he did from the start. {What was in man} (\ti n en ti anthrpi\). Indirect question with \estin\ of the direct changed to the imperfect \n\, a rare idiom in the _Koin_. This supernatural knowledge of man is a mark of deity. Some men of genius can read men better than others, but not in the sense meant here.
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:3:31 @{Is above all} (\epan pantn\). Ablative case with the compound preposition \epan\. See the same idea in strkjv@Romans:9:5|. Here we have the comments of Evangelist (John) concerning the last words of John in verse 30| which place Jesus above himself. He is above all men, not alone above the Baptist. Bernard follows those who treat verses 31-36| as dislocated and put them after verse 21| (the interview with Nicodemus), but they suit better here. {Of the earth} (\ek ts gs\). John is fond of this use of \ek\ for origin and source of character as in strkjv@1:46; strkjv@1John:4:5|. Jesus is the one that comes out of heaven (\ho ek tou ouranou erchomenos\) as he has shown in strkjv@1:1-18|. Hence he is "above all."
rwp@John:5:46 @{Ye would believe me} (\episteuete an emoi\). Conclusion of condition of second class (determined as unfulfilled) with imperfect indicative in both protasis and apodosis and \an\ in apodosis. This was a home-thrust, proving that they did not really believe Moses. {For he wrote of me} (\peri gar emou ekeinos egrapsen\). strkjv@Deuteronomy:18:18f.| is quoted by Peter (Acts:3:22|) as a prophecy of Christ and also by Stephen in strkjv@Acts:7:37|. See also strkjv@John:3:14| about the brazen serpent and strkjv@8:56| about Abraham foreseeing Christ's day. Jesus does here say that Moses wrote concerning him.
rwp@John:6:28 @{What must we do?} (\Ti poimen;\). Present active deliberative subjunctive of \poie\, "What are we to do as a habit?" For the aorist subjunctive (\poismen\) in a like question for a single act see strkjv@Luke:3:10|. For the present indicative (\poioumen\) of inquiry concerning actual conduct see strkjv@John:11:47| (what are we doing?). {That we may work the works of God} (\hina ergazmetha ta erga tou theou\). Final clause with \hina\ and the present middle subjunctive, "that we may go on working the works of God." There may have been an element of vague sincerity in this question in spite of their supercilious attitude.
rwp@John:6:61 @{Knowing in himself} (\eids en heauti\). Second perfect active participle of \oida\. See strkjv@2:25| for this supernatural insight into men's minds. {Murmured} (\gogguzousin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse. See 41| for \gogguz\. {At this} (\peri toutou\). "Concerning this word." {Cause to stumble} (\skandalizei\). Common Synoptic verb from \skandalon\ for which see strkjv@Matthew:5:29|. In John again only in strkjv@16:1|.
rwp@John:8:26 @{I have many things to speak and to judge concerning you} (\polla ech peri humn lalein kai krinein\). Instead of further talk about his own claims (already plain enough) Jesus turns to speak and to judge concerning them and their attitude towards him (cf. verse 16|). Whatever they think of Jesus the Father who sent him is true (\alths\). They cannot evade responsibility for the message heard. Songs:Jesus goes on speaking it from the Father.
rwp@John:8:28 @{When ye have lifted up the Son of man} (\hotan hupsste ton huion tou anthrpou\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ (\hote + an\) and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hupso\, to lift up (_Koin_ verb from \hupsos\, height), used several times in John of the Cross of Christ (3:14; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@12:32,34|). It is unnecessary to render the aorist subjunctive as if a future perfect, simply "whenever ye lift up" (actually lift up, ingressive aorist). In strkjv@Acts:2:33| the verb is used of the Ascension. {Shall ye know} (\gnsesthe\). Future (ingressive aoristic) middle of \ginsk\. _Cognoscetis ex re quod nunc ex verbo non creditis_ (Bengel). But the knowledge from the facts like the fall of Jerusalem will come too late and will not bring a change of heart. The Holy Spirit will convict them concerning judgment (16:8|). For {I am} (\eg eimi\) see on verse ¯24|. {As the Father taught me} (\Kaths edidasken me ho patr\). This claim Jesus repeats (see verse 26|) and clearly makes on his arrival at the feast (7:16f.|). This fact marks Jesus off from the rabbis.
rwp@John:9:21 @{But how he now seeth we know not} (\ps de nun blepei ouk oidamen\). Concerning the third question they profess ignorance both as to the "how" (\ps\) and the "who" (\tis\). {Opened} (\noixen\). First aorist active indicative with single augment of \anoig\, same form as \neixen\ (triple augment) in verse 17|. They were not witnesses of the cure and had the story only from the son as the Pharisees had. {He is of age} (\hlikian echei\). "He has maturity of age." He is an adult. A regular classical phrase in Plato, etc. The parents were wholly right and within their rights.
rwp@John:11:38 @{Again groaning in himself} (\palin embrimmenos en heauti\). Direct reference to the use of this same word (present middle participle here) in verse 33|, only with \en heauti\ (in himself) rather than \ti pneumati\ (in his spirit), practically the same idea. The speculation concerning his power stirred the depths of his nature again. {Cometh to the tomb} (\erchetai eis to mnmeion\). Vivid historical present. {A cave} (\splaion\). Old word (from \speos\, cavern). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:21:13|. {Lay against it} (\epekeito ep' auti\). Imperfect middle of \epikeimai\, old verb to lie upon as in strkjv@21:9| and figuratively (1Corinthians:9:16|). Note repetition of \epi\ with locative case. The use of a cave for burial was common (Genesis:23:19|). Either the body was let down through a horizontal opening (hardly so here) or put in a tomb cut in the face of the rock (if so, \epi\ can mean "against"). The stones were used to keep away wild animals from the bodies.
rwp@John:11:41 @{Songs:they took away the stone} (\ran oun ton lithon\). First aorist active indicative of \air\, but without the explanatory gloss of the Textus Receptus "from the place where the dead was laid" (not genuine). {I thank thee that thou heardest me} (\eucharist soi hoti kousas mou\). See strkjv@6:11| for \euchariste\. Clearly Jesus had prayed to the Father concerning the raising of Lazarus. He has the answer before he acts. "No pomp of incantation, no wrestling in prayer even; but simple words of thanksgiving, as if already Lazarus was restored" (Dods). Jesus well knew the issues involved on this occasion. If he failed, his own claims to be the Son of God (the Messiah), would be hopelessly discredited with all. If he succeeded, the rulers would be so embittered as to compass his own death.
rwp@John:20:9 @{For} (\gar\). Explanatory use of \gar\. {The Scripture} (\tn graphn\). Probably strkjv@Psalms:16:10|. Jesus had repeatedly foretold his resurrection, but that was all forgotten in the great sorrow on their hearts. Only the chief priests and Pharisees recalled the words of Jesus (Matthew:27:62ff.|). {Must} (\dei\). For this use of \dei\ concerning Christ's death and resurrection see strkjv@Mark:8:31; strkjv@Matthew:26:54; strkjv@Luke:9:22; strkjv@17:25; strkjv@22:37; strkjv@24:7,26,44; strkjv@John:3:14; strkjv@12:34; strkjv@Acts:1:16|. Jesus had put emphasis on both the fact and the necessity of his resurrection which the disciples slowly perceived.
rwp@Info_Jude:@ THE RELATION TO II PETER Beyond a doubt one of these Epistles was used by the other, as one can see by comparing particularly strkjv@Jude:1:3-18| and strkjv@2Peter:2:1-18|. As already said concerning II Peter, scholars are greatly divided on this point, and in our present state of knowledge it does not seem possible to reach a solid conclusion. The probability is that not much time elapsed between them. Mayor devotes a whole chapter to the discussion of the relation between II Peter and Jude:and reaches the conclusion "that in Jude:we have the first thought, in Peter the second thought." That is my own feeling, but it is all so subjective that I have no desire to urge the point unduly. Bigg is equally positive that II Peter comes before Jude.
rwp@Jude:1:9 @{Michael the archangel} (\ho Michael ho archaggelos\). Michael is mentioned also in strkjv@Daniel:10:13,21; strkjv@12:1; strkjv@Revelation:12:7|. \Archaggelos\ in N.T. occurs only here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:16|, but in strkjv@Daniel:10:13,20; strkjv@12:1|. {Contending with the devil} (\ti diaboli diakrinomenos\). Present middle participle of \diakrin\, to separate, to strive with as in strkjv@Acts:11:2|. Dative case \diaboli\. {When he disputed} (\hote dielegeto\). Imperfect middle of \dialegomai\ as in strkjv@Mark:9:34|. {Concerning the body of Moses} (\peri tou Muses smatos\). Some refer this to strkjv@Zechariah:3:1|, others to a rabbinical comment on strkjv@Deuteronomy:34:6|. There is a similar reference to traditions in strkjv@Acts:7:22; strkjv@Galatians:3:19; strkjv@Hebrews:2:2; strkjv@2Timothy:3:8|. But this explanation hardly meets the facts. {Durst not bring} (\ouk etolmsen epenegkein\). "Did not dare (first aorist active indicative of \tolma\), to bring against him" (second aorist active infinitive of \epipher\). {A railing accusation} (\krisin blasphmias\). "Charge of blasphemy" where strkjv@2Peter:2:11| has "\blasphmon krisin\." Peter also has \para kurii\ (with the Lord), not in Jude. {The Lord rebuke thee} (\epitimsai soi kurios\). First aorist active optative of \epitima\, a wish about the future. These words occur in strkjv@Zechariah:3:1-10| where the angel of the Lord replies to the charges of Satan. Clement of Alex. (_Adumb. in Ep. Judae_) says that Jude:quoted here the _Assumption of Moses_, one of the apocryphal books. Origen says the same thing. Mayor thinks that the author of the _Assumption of Moses_ took these words from Zechariah and put them in the mouth of the Archangel Michael. There is a Latin version of the _Assumption_. Some date it as early as B.C. 2, others after A.D. 44.
rwp@Info_Luke @ THE DATE OF THE GOSPEL There are two outstanding facts to mark off the date of this Gospel by Luke. It was later than the Gospel of Mark since Luke makes abundant use of it. It was before the Acts of the Apostles since he definitely refers to it in strkjv@Acts:1:1|. Unfortunately the precise date of both _termini_ is uncertain. There are still some scholars who hold that the author of the Acts shows knowledge of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus and so is after A.D. 85, a mistaken position, in my opinion, but a point to be discussed when Acts is reached. Still others more plausibly hold that the Acts was written after the destruction of Jerusalem and that the Gospel of Luke has a definite allusion to that event (Luke:21:20f.|), which is interpreted as a prophecy _post eventum_ instead of a prediction by Christ a generation beforehand. Many who accept this view hold to authorship of both Acts and Gospel by Luke. I have long held the view, now so ably defended by Harnack, that the Acts of the Apostles closes as it does for the simple and obvious reason that Paul was still a prisoner in Rome. Whether Luke meant the Acts to be used in the trial in Rome, which may or may not have come to pass, is not the point. Some argue that Luke contemplated a third book which would cover the events of the trial and Paul's later career. There is no proof of that view. The outstanding fact is that the book closes with Paul already a prisoner for two years in Rome. If the Acts was written about A.D. 63, as I believe to be the case, then obviously the Gospel comes earlier. How much before we do not know. It so happens that Paul was a prisoner a little over two years in Caesarea. That period gave Luke abundant opportunity for the kind of research of which he speaks in strkjv@Luke:1:1-4|. In Palestine he could have access to persons familiar with the earthly life and teachings of Jesus and to whatever documents were already produced concerning such matters. Luke may have produced the Gospel towards the close of the stay of Paul in Caesarea or during the early part of the first Roman imprisonment, somewhere between A.D. 59 and 62. The other testimony concerns the date of Mark's Gospel which has already been discussed in volume I. There is no real difficulty in the way of the early date of Mark's Gospel. All the facts that are known admit, even argue for a date by A.D. 60. If Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome, as is possible, it would certainly be before A.D. 64, the date of the burning of Rome by Nero. There are scholars, however, who argue for a much earlier date for his gospel, even as early as A.D. 50. The various aspects of the Synoptic problem are ably discussed by Hawkins in his _Horae Synopticae_, by Sanday and others in _Oxford Studies in the Synoptic Problem_, by Streeter in his _The Four Gospels_, by Hayes in his _The Synoptic Gospels and the Book of Acts_, by Harnack in his _Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_, by Stanton in his _The Gospels as Historical Documents_, and by many others. My own views are given at length in my _Studies in Mark's Gospel_ and in _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_.
rwp@Info_Luke @ THE SOURCES OF THE GOSPEL In his Preface or Prologue (Luke:1:1-4|) the author tells us that he had two kinds of sources, oral and written, and that they were many, how many we have no way of telling. It is now generally accepted that we know two of his written sources, Mark's Gospel and Q or the Logia of Jesus (written by Matthew, Papias says). Mark is still preserved and it is not difficult for any one by the use of a harmony of the Gospels to note how Luke made use of Mark, incorporating what he chose, adapting it in various ways, not using what did not suit his purposes. The other source we only know in the non-Markan portions of Matthew and Luke, that is the material common to both, but not in Mark. This also can be noted by any one in a harmony. Only it is probable that this source was more extensive than just the portions used by both Matthew and Luke. It is probable that both Matthew and Luke each used portions of the Logia not used by the other. But there is a large portion of Luke's Gospel which is different from Mark and Matthew. Some scholars call this source L. There is little doubt that Luke had another document for the material peculiar to him, but it is also probable that he had several others. He spoke of "many." This applies especially to chapters 9 to 21. But Luke expressly says that he had received help from "eye-witnesses and ministers of the word," in oral form this means. It is, then, probable that Luke made numerous notes of such data and used them along with the written sources at his command. This remark applies particularly to chapters 1 and 2 which have a very distinct Semitic (Aramaic) colouring due to the sources used. It is possible, of course, that Mary the mother of Jesus may have written a statement concerning these important matters or that Luke may have had converse with her or with one of her circle. Ramsay, in his volume, _Was Christ Born at Bethlehem?_ shows the likelihood of Luke's contact with Mary or her circle during these two years at Caesarea. Luke handles the data acquired with care and skill as he claims in his Prologue and as the result shows. The outcome is what Renan called the most beautiful book in the world.
rwp@Luke:1:1 @{Forasmuch as} (\epeidper\). Here alone in the N.T., though common in literary Attic. Appears in the papyri. A triple compound (\epei\ = since, \d\ = admittedly true, \per\ = intensive particle to emphasize importance). {Many} (\polloi\). How many no one knows, but certainly more than two or three. We know that Luke used the Logia of Jesus written by Matthew in Aramaic (Papias) and Mark's Gospel. Undoubtedly he had other written sources. {Have taken in hand} (\epecheirsan\). A literal translation of \epicheire\ (from \cheir\, hand and \epi\, upon). Both Hippocrates and Galen use this word in their introduction to their medical works. Here only in the N.T., though a common literary word. Common in the papyri for undertaking with no idea of failure or blame. Luke does not mean to cast reflection on those who preceded him. The apocryphal gospels were all much later and are not in his mind. Luke had secured fuller information and planned a book on a larger scale and did surpass them with the result that they all perished save Mark's Gospel and what Matthew and Luke possess of the Logia of Jesus. There was still room for Luke's book. That motive influences every author and thus progress is made. {To draw up, a narrative} (\anataxasthai digsin\). Ingressive aorist middle infinitive. This verb \anataxasthai\ has been found only in Plutarch's _Moral_. 968 CD about an elephant "rehearsing" by moonlight certain tricks it had been taught (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). That was from memory going regularly through the thing again. But the idea in the word is plain enough. The word is composed of \tass\, a common verb for arranging things in proper order and \ana\, again. Luke means to say that those before him had made attempts to rehearse in orderly fashion various matters about Christ. "The expression points to a connected series of narratives in some order (\taxis\), topical or chronological rather than to isolated narratives" (Bruce). "They had produced something more than mere notes or anecdotes" (Plummer). \Digsis\ means leading or carrying a thing through, not a mere incident. Galen applies this word some seventy-five times to the writing of Hippocrates. {Which have been fulfilled} (\tn peplrphormenn\). Perfect passive participle from \plrophore\ and that from \plrs\ (full) and \pher\ (to bring). Hence to bring or make full. The verb is rare outside of the LXX and the N.T. Papyri examples occur for finishing off a legal matter or a financial matter in full. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 86f.) gives examples from the papyri and inscriptions for completing a task or being convinced or satisfied in mind. The same ambiguity occurs here. When used of persons in the N.T. the meaning is to be convinced, or fully persuaded (Romans:4:21; strkjv@14:5; strkjv@Hebrews:6:11; strkjv@10:22|). When used of things it has the notion of completing or finishing (2Timothy:4:5,17|). Luke is here speaking of "matters" (\pragmatn\). Luke may refer to the matters connected with Christ's life which have been brought to a close among us or accomplished. Bruce argues plausibly that he means fulness of knowledge "concerning the things which have become widely known among us Christians." In strkjv@Colossians:2:2| we have "fulness of understanding" (\ts plrophorias ts suneses\). In modern Greek the verb means to inform. The careful language of Luke here really pays a tribute to those who had preceded him in their narratives concerning Christ.
rwp@Luke:2:46 @{After three days} (\meta hmeras treis\). One day out, one day back, and on the third day finding him. {In the temple} (\en ti hieri\). Probably on the terrace where members of the Sanhedrin gave public instruction on sabbaths and feast-days, so probably while the feast was still going on. The rabbis probably sat on benches in a circle. The listeners on the ground, among whom was Jesus the boy in a rapture of interest. {Both hearing them and asking them questions} (\kai akouonta autn kai epertnta autous\). Paul sat at the feet of Gamaliel (Acts:22:3|). Picture this eager boy alive with interest. It was his one opportunity in a theological school outside of the synagogue to hear the great rabbis expound the problems of life. This was the most unusual of all children, to be sure, in intellectual grasp and power. But it is a mistake to think that children of twelve do not think profoundly concerning the issues of life. What father or mother has ever been able to answer a child's questions?
rwp@Luke:6:39 @{Also a parable} (\kai paraboln\). Plummer thinks that the second half of the sermon begins here as indicated by Luke's insertion of "And he spake (\eipen de\) at this point. Luke has the word parable some fifteen times both for crisp proverbs and for the longer narrative comparisons. This is the only use of the term parable concerning the metaphors in the Sermon on the Mount. But in both Matthew and Luke's report of the discourse there are some sixteen possible applications of the word. Two come right together: The blind leading the blind, the mote and the beam. Matthew gives the parabolic proverb of the blind leading the blind later (Matthew:15:14|). Jesus repeated these sayings on various occasions as every teacher does his characteristic ideas. Songs:Luke strkjv@6:40; strkjv@Matthew:10:24|, strkjv@Luke:6:45; strkjv@Matthew:12:34f.| {Can} (\Mti dunatai\). The use of \mti\ in the question shows that a negative answer is expected. {Guide} (\hodgein\). Common verb from \hodgos\ (guide) and this from \hodos\ (way) and \hgeomai\, to lead or guide. {Shall they not both fall?} (\ouchi amphoteroi empesountai;\). \Ouchi\, a sharpened negative from \ouk\, in a question expecting the answer Yes. Future middle indicative of the common verb \empipt\. {Into a pit} (\eis bothunon\). Late word for older \bothros\.
rwp@Luke:7:1 @{After} (\epeid, epei and d\). This conjunction was written \epei d\ in Homer and is simple \epei\ with the intensive \d\ added and even \epei d per\ once in N.T. (Luke:1:1|). This is the only instance of the temporal use of \epeid\ in the N.T. The causal sense occurs only in Luke and Paul, for \epei\ is the correct text in strkjv@Matthew:21:46|. {Had ended} (\eplrsen\). First aorist active indicative. There is here a reference to the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount, but with nothing concerning the impression produced by the discourse such as is seen in strkjv@Matthew:7:28|. This verse really belongs as the conclusion of Chapter 6, not as the beginning of Chapter 7. {In the ears of the people} (\eis tas akoas tou laou\). \Ako\ from \akou\, to hear, is used of the sense of hearing (1Corinthians:12:17|), the ear with which one hears (Mark:7:35; strkjv@Hebrews:5:11|), the thing heard or the report (Rom strkjv@10:16|) or oral instruction (Galatians:3:2,5|). Both strkjv@Matthew:8:5-13; strkjv@Luke:7:1-10| locate the healing of the centurion's servant in Capernaum where Jesus was after the Sermon on the Mount.
rwp@Luke:8:16 @{When he hath lighted a lamp} (\luchnon hapsas\). It is a portable lamp (\luchnon\) that one lights (\hapsas\ aorist active participle of \hapt\, to kindle, fasten to, light). {With a vessel} (\skeuei\, instrumental case of \skeuos\). Here strkjv@Mark:4:21| has the more definite figure "under the bushel" as has strkjv@Matthew:5:15|. {Under the bed} (\hupokat klins\). Here strkjv@Mark:4:21| has the regular \hupo tn klinn\ instead of the late compound \hupokat\. Ragg notes that Matthew distributes the sayings of Jesus given here by strkjv@Luke:8:16-18; strkjv@Mark:4:21-25| concerning the parable of the lamp and gives them in three separate places (Matthew:5:15; strkjv@10:26; strkjv@13:12|). That is true, but it does not follow that Mark and Luke have bunched together separate sayings or that Matthew has scattered sayings delivered only on one occasion. One of the slowest lessons for some critics to learn is that Jesus repeated favourite sayings on different occasions and in different groupings just as every popular preacher and teacher does today. See on ¯Mark:4:21| for further discussion of the lamp and stand. {May see the light} (\Blepsin to phs\). In strkjv@Matthew:5:16| Jesus has it "may see your good works." The purpose of light is to let one see something else, not the light. Note present subjunctive (\blepsin\), linear action "Jesus had kindled a light within them. They must not hide it, but must see that it spreads to others" (Plummer). The parable of the lamp throws light on the parable of the sower.
rwp@Luke:9:31 @{There talked with him} (\sunelaloun auti\). Imperfect active, were talking with him. {Who appeared in glory} (\hoi ophthentes en doxi\). First aorist passive participle of \hora\. This item peculiar to Luke. Compare verse 26|. {Spake of his decease} (\elegon tn exodon\). Imperfect active, were talking about his \exodus\ (departure from earth to heaven) very much like our English word "decease" (Latin _decessus_, a going away). The glorious light graphically revealed Moses and Elijah talking with Jesus about the very subject concerning which Peter had dared to rebuke Jesus for mentioning (Mark:8:32; strkjv@Matthew:16:22|). This very word \exodus\ (way out) in the sense of death occurs in strkjv@2Peter:1:15| and is followed by a brief description of the Transfiguration glory. Other words for death (\thanatos\) in the N.T. are \ekbasis\, going out as departure (Hebrews:13:7|), \aphixis\, departing (Acts:20:29|), \analusis\, loosening anchor (2Timothy:4:6|) and \analusai\ (Phillipians:1:23|). {To accomplish} (\plroun\). To fulfil. Moses had led the Exodus from Egypt. Jesus will accomplish the exodus of God's people into the Promised Land on high. See on Mark and Matthew for discussion of significance of the appearance of Moses and Elijah as representatives of law and prophecy and with a peculiar death. The purpose of the Transfiguration was to strengthen the heart of Jesus as he was praying long about his approaching death and to give these chosen three disciples a glimpse of his glory for the hour of darkness coming. No one on earth understood the heart of Jesus and so Moses and Elijah came. The poor disciples utterly failed to grasp the significance of it 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:11:53 @{From thence} (\k'akeithen\). Out of the Pharisee's house. What became of the breakfast we are not told, but the rage of both Pharisees and lawyers knew no bounds. {To press upon him} (\enechein\). An old Greek verb to hold in, to be enraged at, to have it in for one. It is the same verb used of the relentless hatred of Herodias for John the Baptist (Mark:6:19|). {To provoke him to speak} (\apostomatizein\). From \apo\ and \stoma\ (mouth). Plato uses it of repeating to a pupil for him to recite from memory, then to recite by heart (Plutarch). Here (alone in the N.T.) the verb means to ply with questions, to entice to answers, to catechize. {Of many things} (\peri pleionn\). "Concerning more (comparative) things." They were stung to the quick by these woes which laid bare their hollow hypocrisy.
rwp@Luke:14:32 @{Or else} (\ei de mge\). Same idiom in strkjv@5:36|. Luke is fond of this formula. {An ambassage} (\presbeian\). Old and common word for the office of ambassador, composed of old men (\presbeis\) like Japanese Elder Statesmen who are supposed to possess wisdom. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:19:14|. {Asketh conditions of peace} (\erti pros eirnn\). The use of \erta\ in this sense of beg or petition is common in the papyri and _Koin_ generally. The original use of asking a question survives also. The text is uncertain concerning \pros eirnn\ which means with \erta\, to ask negotiations for peace. In B we have \eis\ instead of \pros\ like verse 28|. Most MSS. have \ta\ before \pros\ or \eis\, but not in Aleph and B. It is possible that the \ta\ was omitted because of preceding \tai\ (\homoeoteleuton\), but the sense is the same. See strkjv@Romans:14:19| \ta ts eirns\, the things of peace, which concern or look towards peace, the preliminaries of peace.
rwp@Luke:17:31 @{Let him not go down} (\m katabat\). Second aorist active imperative of \katabain\ with \m\ in a prohibition in the third person singular. The usual idiom here would be \m\ and the aorist subjunctive. See strkjv@Mark:13:15f.; strkjv@Matthew:24:17f.| when these words occur in the great eschatological discussion concerning flight before the destruction of Jerusalem. Here the application is "absolute indifference to all worldly interests as the attitude of readiness for the Son of Man" (Plummer).
rwp@Luke:18:4 @{He would not} (\ouk thelen\). Imperfect tense of continued refusal. {Though} (\ei kai\). Concerning sentence, not \kai ei\ (even if).
rwp@Luke:24:27 @{Interpreted} (\dirmneusen\). First aorist active (constative aorist) indicative of \diermneu\ (Margin has the imperfect \dirmneuen\), intensive compound (\dia\) of \hermneu\, the old verb to interpret from \hermneus\, interpreter, and that from \Herms\, the messenger of the gods as the people of Lystra took Paul to be (Acts:14:12|). But what wonderful exegesis the two disciples were now hearing! {Concerning himself} (\peri heauton\). Jesus found himself in the Old Testament, a thing that some modern scholars do not seem able to do.
rwp@Mark:4:2 @{He taught them} (\edidasken autous\). Imperfect tense describing it as going on. {In parables} (\en parabolais\). As in strkjv@3:23|, only here more extended parables. See on ¯Matthew:13| for discussion concerning Christ's use of parables. Eight are given there, one (the Lamp both in strkjv@Mark:4:21| and strkjv@Luke:8:16| (both Sower and the Lamp in Luke), one alone in strkjv@Mark:4:26-29| (seed growing of itself) not in Matthew or Luke, ten on this occasion. Only four are mentioned in strkjv@Mark:4:1-34| (The Sower, the Lamp, the Seed Growing of Itself, the Mustard Seed). But Mark adds (4:34|) "without a parable spake he not unto them," clearly meaning that Jesus spoke many others on this occasion and Matt. after mentioning eight (Matthew:13:34|) makes the same statement. Manifestly, therefore, Jesus spoke many parables on this day and all theories of exegesis or dispensations on the basis of the number of these kingdom parables are quite beside the mark. In beginning Jesus said: {Hearken} (\Akouete\). It is significant that even Jesus had to ask people to listen when he spoke. See also verse 9|.
rwp@Mark:4:34 @{But privately to his disciples he expounded all things} (\kat' idian de tois idiois mathtais epeluen panta\). To his own (\idiois\) disciples in private, in distinction from the mass of the people Jesus was in the habit (imperfect tense, \epeluen\) of {disclosing}, revealing, all things (\panta\) in plain language without the parabolic form used before the crowds. This verb \epilu\ occurs in the N.T. only here and in strkjv@Acts:19:39| where the town-clerk of Ephesus says of the troubles by the mob: "It shall be settled in the regular assembly" (\en ti ennomi ekklsii epiluthsetai\). First future passive indicative from \epilu\. The word means to give additional (\epi\) loosening (\lu\), so to explain, to make plainer, clearer, even to the point of revelation. This last is the idea of the substantive in strkjv@2Peter:1:20| where even the Revised Version has it: "No prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation" (\psa prophteia graphs idias epiluses ou ginetai\). Here the use of \ginetai\ (comes) with the ablative case (\epiluses\) and the explanation given in verse strkjv@2Peter:1:21| shows plainly that disclosure or revelation to the prophet is what is meant, not interpretation of what the prophet said. The prophetic impulse and message came from God through the Holy Spirit. In private the further disclosures of Jesus amounted to fresh revelations concerning the mysteries of the kingdom of God.
rwp@Mark:8:27 @{Into the villages of Caesarea Philippi} (\eis ts kmas Kaisaris ts Philippou\). Parts (\mer\) strkjv@Matthew:16:13| has, the Caesarea of Philippi in contrast to the one down on the Mediterranean Sea. Mark means the villages belonging to the district around Caesarea Philippi. This region is on a spur of Mount Hermon in Iturea ruled by Herod Philip so that Jesus is safe from annoyance by Herod Antipas or the Pharisees and Sadducees. Up here on this mountain slope Jesus will have his best opportunity to give the disciples special teaching concerning the crucifixion just a little over six months ahead. Songs:Jesus asked (\eprt\, descriptive imperfect) {Who do men say that I am?} (\Tina me legousin hoi anthrpoi einai;\). strkjv@Matthew:16:13| has "the Son of Man" in place of "I" here in Mark and in strkjv@Luke:9:18|. He often described himself as "the Son of Man." Certainly here the phrase could not mean merely "a man." They knew the various popular opinions about Jesus of which Herod Antipas had heard (Mark:3:21,31|). It was time that the disciples reveal how much they had been influenced by their environment as well as by the direct instruction of Jesus.
rwp@Mark:9:6 @{For he wist not what to answer} (\ou gar idei ti apokrithi\). Deliberative subjunctive retained in indirect question. But why did Peter say anything? Luke says that he spoke, "not knowing what he said," as an excuse for the inappropriateness of his remarks. Perhaps Peter felt embarrassed at having been asleep (Luke:9:32|) and the feast of tabernacles or booths (\sknai\) was near. See on ¯Matthew:17:4|. Peter and the others apparently had not heard the talk of Moses and Elijah with Jesus about his decease (\exodon\, exodus, departure) and little knew the special comfort that Jesus had found in this understanding of the great approaching tragedy concerning which Peter had shown absolute stupidity (Mark:8:32f.|) so recently. See on ¯Matthew:17:5| about the overshadowing and the voice.
rwp@Mark:10:3 @{What did Moses command you?} (\Ti humin eneteilato Muss;\). Jesus at once brought up the issue concerning the teaching of Moses (Deuteronomy:24:1|). But Jesus goes back beyond this concession here allowed by Moses to the ideal state commanded in strkjv@Genesis:1:27|.
rwp@Mark:10:18 @{Why callest thou me good?} (\Ti me legeis agathon;\). Songs:Luke:18:19|. strkjv@Matthew:19:17| has it: "Why asketh thou concerning that which is good? "The young ruler was probably sincere and not using mere fulsome compliment, but Jesus challenges him to define his attitude towards him as was proper. Did he mean "good" (\agathos\) in the absolute sense as applied to God? The language is not a disclaiming of deity on the part of Jesus. {That I may inherit} (\hina klronoms\). strkjv@Matthew:19:16| has (\sch\), that I may "get."
rwp@Mark:10:39 @See on ¯Matthew:20:23-28| for discussion on these memorable verses (39-45|) identical in both Matthew and Mark. In particular in verse 45| note the language of Jesus concerning his death as "a ransom for many" (\lutron anti polln\), words of the Master that were not understood by the apostles when spoken by Jesus and which have been preserved for us by Peter through Mark. Some today seek to empty these words of all real meaning as if Jesus could not have or hold such a conception concerning his death for sinners.
rwp@Mark:10:46 @{From Jericho} (\apo Iereich\). See on ¯Matthew:20:29| for discussion of this phrase and Luke's (Luke:18:35|) "nigh unto Jericho" and the two Jerichos, the old and the new Roman (Luke). The new Jericho was "about five miles W. of the Jordan and fifteen E. of Jerusalem, near the mouth of the _Wady Kelt_, and more than a mile south of the site of the ancient town" (Swete). {Great multitude} (\ochlou hikanou\). Considerable, more than sufficient. Often in Luke and the papyri in this sense. See strkjv@Matthew:3:11| for the other sense of fit for \hikanos\. {Bartimaeus} (\Bartimaios\). Aramaic name like Bartholomew, \bar\ meaning son like Hebrew _ben_. Songs:Mark explains the name meaning "the son of Timaeus" (\ho huios Timaiou\). Mark alone gives his name while strkjv@Matthew:20:30| mentions two which see for discussion. {Blind beggar} (\tuphlos prosaits\), "begging" (\epaitn\) Luke has it (Luke:18:35|). All three Gospels picture him as {sitting by the roadside} (\ekathto para tn hodon\). It was a common sight. Bartimaeus had his regular place. Vincent quotes Thomson concerning Ramleh: "I once walked the streets counting all that were either blind or had defective eyes, and it amounted to about one-half the male population. The women I could not count, for they are rigidly veiled" (_The Land and the Book_). The dust, the glare of the sun, the unsanitary habits of the people spread contagious eye-diseases.
rwp@Mark:12:26 @{In the place concerning the Bush} (\epi tou batou\). This technical use of \epi\ is good Greek, in the matter of, in the passage about, the Bush. \Batos\ is masculine here, feminine in strkjv@Luke:20:37|. The reference is to strkjv@Exodus:3:3-6| (in the book of Moses, \en ti bibli\).
rwp@Mark:16:18 @{They shall take up serpents} (\opheis arousin\). Jesus had said something like this in strkjv@Luke:10:19| and Paul was unharmed by the serpent in Malta (Acts:28:3f.|). {If they drink any deadly thing} (\k'an thanasimon ti pisin\). This is the only N.T. instance of the old Greek word \thanasimos\ (deadly). strkjv@James:3:8| has \thanatphoros\, deathbearing. Bruce considers these verses in Mark "a great lapse from the high level of Matthew's version of the farewell words of Jesus" and holds that "taking up venomous serpents and drinking deadly poison seem to introduce us into the twilight of apocryphal story." The great doubt concerning the genuineness of these verses (fairly conclusive proof against them in my opinion) renders it unwise to take these verses as the foundation for doctrine or practice unless supported by other and genuine portions of the N.T.
rwp@Matthew:1:18 @{Of the Holy Ghost} (\ek pneumatos hagiou\). The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She "was found with child" (\heureth en gastri echousa\). This way of putting it, the usual Greek idiom, plainly shows that it was the discovery that shocked Joseph. He did not as yet know what Matthew plainly asserts that the Holy Ghost, not Joseph and not any man, was responsible for the pregnancy of Mary. The problem of the Virgin Birth of Jesus has been a disturbing fact to some through all the ages and is today to those who do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ, the Son of God, before his Incarnation on earth. This is the primal fact about the Birth of Christ. The Incarnation of Christ is clearly stated by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|; and involved in strkjv@Colossians:1:15-19|) and by John (John:1:14; strkjv@17:5|). If one frankly admits the actual pre-existence of Christ and the real Incarnation, he has taken the longest and most difficult step in the matter of the supernatural Birth of Christ. That being true, no merely human birth without the supernatural element can possibly explain the facts. Incarnation is far more than the Indwelling of God by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. To admit real incarnation and also full human birth, both father and mother, creates a greater difficulty than to admit the Virgin Birth of Jesus begotten by the Holy Spirit, as Matthew here says, and born of the Virgin Mary. It is true that only Matthew and Luke tell the story of the supernatural birth of Jesus, though strkjv@John:1:14| seems to refer to it. Mark has nothing whatever concerning the birth and childhood of Jesus and so cannot be used as a witness on the subject. Both Matthew and Luke present the birth of Jesus as not according to ordinary human birth. Jesus had no human father. There is such a thing in nature as parthenogenesis in the lower orders of life. But that scientific fact has no bearing here. We see here God sending his Son into the world to be the world's Saviour and he gave him a human mother, but not a human father so that Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of Man, the God Man. Matthew tells the story of the birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph as Luke gives it from the standpoint of Mary. The two narratives harmonize with each other. One credits these most wonderful of all birth narratives according as he believes in the love and power of Almighty God to do what he wills. There is no miracle with God who has all power and all knowledge. The laws of nature are simply the expression of God's will, but he has not revealed all his will in the laws that we discover. God is Spirit. He is Person. He holds in his own power all life. strkjv@John:3:16| is called the Little Gospel because it puts briefly the love of God for men in sending his own Son to live and die for us.
rwp@Matthew:2:8 @{Sent them to Bethlehem and said} (\pempsas autous eis Bthleem eipen\). Simultaneous aorist participle, "sending said." They were to "search out accurately" (\exetasate akribs\) concerning the child. Then "bring me word, that I also may come and worship him." The deceit of Herod seemed plausible enough and might have succeeded but for God's intervention to protect His Son from the jealous rage of Herod.
rwp@Matthew:14:1 @{Herod the tetrarch} (\Hrids tetraarchs\). Herod Antipas ruler of Galilee and Perea, one-fourth of the dominion of Herod the Great. {The report concerning Jesus} (\tn akoun Isou\). See on ¯4:24|. Cognate accusative, heard the hearing (rumour), objective genitive. It is rather surprising that he had not heard of Jesus before.
rwp@Matthew:14:4 @{For John said unto him} (\elegen gar Ians auti\). Possibly the Pharisees may have put Herod up to inveigling John to Machaerus on one of his visits there to express an opinion concerning his marriage to Herodias (Broadus) and the imperfect tense (\elegen\) probably means that John said it repeatedly. It was a blunt and brave thing that John said. It cost him his head, but it is better to have a head like John's and lose it than to have an ordinary head and keep it. Herod Antipas was a politician and curbed his resentment toward John by his fear of the people who still held (\eichon\, imperfect tense) him as a prophet.
rwp@Matthew:19:17 @{Concerning that which is good} (\peri tou agathou\). He had asked Jesus in verse 16| "what good thing" he should do. He evidently had a light idea of the meaning of \agathos\. "This was only a teacher's way of leading on a pupil" (Bruce). Songs:Jesus explains that "One there is who is good," one alone who is really good in the absolute sense.
rwp@Matthew:24:44 @{That ye think not} (\hi ou dokeite hri\). It is useless to set the day and hour for Christ's coming. It is folly to neglect it. This figure of the thief will be used also by Paul concerning the unexpectedness of Christ's second coming (1Thessalonians:5:2|). See also strkjv@Matthew:24:50| for the unexpectedness of the coming with punishment for the evil servant.
rwp@Matthew:27:19 @{His wife} (\h gun autou\). Poor Pilate was getting more entangled every moment as he hesitated to set Jesus free whom he knew to be free of any crime against Caesar. Just at the moment when he was trying to enlist the people in behalf of Jesus against the schemes of the Jewish leaders, his wife sent a message about her dream concerning Jesus. She calls Jesus "that righteous man" (\ti dikaii ekeini\) and her psychical sufferings increased Pilate's superstitious fears. Tradition names her Procla and even calls her a Christian which is not probable. But it was enough to unnerve the weak Pilate as he sat on the judgment-seat (\epi tou bmatos\) up over the pavement.
rwp@Philemon:1:19 @{Write} (\egrapsa\). Epistolary aorist. {With mine hand} (\ti emi cheiri\). Instrumental case and a note of hand that can be collected. See strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:17; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:21; strkjv@Colossians:4:18|. {I will repay it} (\eg apotis\). Future active indicative of \apotin\ (\apoti\) to pay back, to pay off. The more usual word was \apods\. This is Paul's promissory note. Deissmann (_Light, etc._, p. 331) notes how many of the papyri are concerning debts. {That I say not} (\hina m leg\). Neat idiom as in strkjv@2Corinthians:9:4|, delicately reminding Philemon that Paul had led him also to Christ. {Thou owest to me even thine own self besides} (\kai seauton moi prosopheileis\). Old verb, only here in N.T., Paul using the verb \opheil\ of verse 18| with \pros\ added. He used every available argument to bring Philemon to see the higher ground of brotherhood in Christ about Onesimus.
rwp@Philippians:1:12 @{The things which happened unto me} (\ta kat' eme\). "The things concerning me" = "my affairs" as common in Josephus. {Have fallen out rather} (\mallon elluthen\). "Have come rather." Second perfect active indicative of \erchomai\. {Unto the progress} (\eis prokopn\). Late word from \prokopt\, common verb, to cut or strike forward, but this late substantive does not occur in classical Greek. It is a technical term in Stoic philosophy for "progress toward wisdom" and it appears also in the papyri and the LXX. In N.T. only here, verse 25; strkjv@1Timothy:4:15|.
rwp@Philippians:2:23 @{Songs:soon as I shall see} (\hs an aphid\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hs an\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \aphora\. The oldest MSS. (Aleph A B D) have \aphid\ (old aspirated form) rather than \apid\. {How it will go with me} (\ta peri eme\). On the force of \apo\ with \hora\ (look away) see strkjv@Hebrews:12:2|. "The things concerning me," the outcome of the trial. Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:4:17,19|.
rwp@Revelation:5:13 @{Every created thing} (\pn ktisma\). Every creature in a still wider antiphonal circle beyond the circle of angels (from \ktiz\, for which see strkjv@1Timothy:4:4; strkjv@James:1:18|), from all the four great fields of life (in heaven, upon the earth, under the earth as in verse 3|, with on the sea \epi ts thalasss\ added). No created thing is left out. This universal chorus of praise to Christ from all created life reminds one of the profound mystical passage in strkjv@Romans:8:20-22| concerning the sympathetic agony of creation (\ktisis\) in hope of freedom from the bondage of corruption. If the trail of the serpent is on all creation, it will be ultimately thrown off. {Saying} (\legontas\). Masculine (construction according to sense, personifying the created things) if genuine, though some MSS. have \legonta\ (grammatical gender agreeing with \panta\) present active participle of \leg\, to say. {And to the Lamb} (\kai ti arnii\). Dative case. Praise and worship are rendered to the Lamb precisely as to God on the throne. Note separate articles here in the doxology as in strkjv@4:11| and the addition of \to kratos\ (active power) in place of \ischus\ (reserve of strength) in strkjv@5:12|.
rwp@Revelation:22:6 @{He said unto me} (\eipen moi\). Apparently the same angel as in strkjv@22:1| (21:9,15|). {These words} (\houtoi hoi logoi\). The same words used in strkjv@21:5| by the angel there. Whatever the application there, here the angel seems to endorse as "faithful and true" (\pistoi kai althinoi\) not merely the preceding vision (21:9-22:5|), but the revelations of the entire book. The language added proves this: "Sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly come to pass" (\apesteilen ton aggelon autou deixai tois doulois autou ha dei genesthai en tachei\), a direct reference to strkjv@1:1| concerning the purpose of Christ's revelation to John in this book. For "the God of the spirits of the prophets" (\ho theos tn pneumatn tn prophtn\) see strkjv@19:10; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:32|. Probably the prophets' own spirits enlightened by the Holy Spirit (10:7; strkjv@11:8; strkjv@22:9|).
rwp@Info_Revelation @ THE APOCALYPTIC STYLE The book claims to be an apocalypse (Revelation:1:1|) and has to be treated as such. It is an unveiling (\apokalupsis\, from \apokalupt\) or revelation of Jesus Christ, a prophecy, in other words, of a special type, like Ezekiel, Zechariah, and Daniel in the Old Testament. There was a considerable Jewish apocalyptic literature by this time when John wrote, much of it B.C., some of it A.D., like the Book of Enoch, the Apocalypse of Baruch, the Book of Jubilees, the Assumption of Moses, the Psalms of Solomon, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Sibylline Oracles, some of them evidently "worked over by Christian hands" (Swete). Jesus himself used the apocalyptic style at times (Mark:13; strkjv@Matthew:24,25; strkjv@Luke:21|). Paul in strkjv@1Corinthians:14| spoke of the unpremeditated apocalyptic utterances in the Christian meetings and suggested restraints concerning them. "The Revelation of John is the only written apocalypse, as it is the only written prophecy of the Apostolic age.... The first Christian apocalypse came on the crest of this long wave of apocalyptic effort" (Swete). The reason for this style of writing is usually severe persecution and the desire to deliver a message in symbolic form. The effort of Antiochus Epiphanes, who claimed to be "a god manifest," to hellenize the Jews aroused violent opposition and occasioned many apocalypses to cheer the persecuted Jews.
rwp@Romans:1:3 @{Concerning his Son} (\peri tou huiou autou\). Just as Jesus found himself in the O.T. (Luke:24:27,46|). The deity of Christ here stated. {According to the flesh} (\kata sarka\). His real humanity alongside of his real deity. For the descent from David see strkjv@Matthew:1:1,6,20; strkjv@Luke:1:27; strkjv@John:7:42; strkjv@Acts:13:23|, etc.
rwp@Romans:1:8 @{First} (\prton men\). Adverb in the accusative case, but no \epeita de\ (in the next place) as in strkjv@Hebrews:7:2| or \epeita\ as in strkjv@James:3:17| follows. The rush of thoughts crowds out the balanced phraseology as in strkjv@Romans:3:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18|. {Through} (\dia\). As the mediator or medium of thanksgiving as in strkjv@7:25|. {For} (\peri\). Concerning, about. {That} (\hoti\). Or because. Either declarative or causal \hoti\ makes sense here. {Your faith} (\h pistis humn\). "Your Christianity" (Sanday and Headlam). {Is proclaimed} (\kataggelletai\). Present passive indicative of \kataggell\, to announce (\aggell\) up and down (\kata\). See also \anaggell\, to bring back news (John:5:15|), \apaggell\, to announce from one as the source (Matthew:2:8|), \prokataggell\, to announce far and wide beforehand (Acts:3:18|). {Throughout all the world} (\en holi ti kosmi\). Natural hyperbole as in strkjv@Colossians:1:6; strkjv@Acts:17:6|. But widely known because the church was in the central city of the empire.
rwp@Romans:3:3 @{For what if?} (\ti gar ei?\). But Westcott and Hort print it, \Ti gar? ei\. See strkjv@Phillipians:1:18| for this exclamatory use of \ti gar\ (for how? How stands the case?). {Some were without faith} (\pistsan\). First aorist active indicative of \apiste\, old verb, to disbelieve. This is the common N.T. meaning (Luke:24:11,41; strkjv@Acts:28:24; strkjv@Romans:4:20|). Some of them "disbelieved," these "depositaries and guardians of revelation" (Denney). But the word also means to be unfaithful to one's trust and Lightfoot argues for that idea here and in strkjv@2Timothy:2:13|. The Revised Version renders it "faithless" there. Either makes sense here and both ideas are true of some of the Jews, especially concerning the Messianic promises and Jesus. {The faithfulness of God} (\tn pistin tou theou\). Undoubtedly \pistis\ has this sense here and not "faith." God has been faithful (2Timothy:2:13|) whether the Jews (some of them) were simply disbelievers or untrue to their trust. Paul can use the words in two senses in verse 3|, but there is no real objection to taking \pistsan, apistian, pistin\, all to refer to faithfulness rather than just faith.
rwp@Romans:8:3 @{That the law could not do} (\to adunaton tou nomou\). Literally, "the impossibility of the law" as shown in strkjv@7:7-24|, either nominative absolute or accusative of general reference. No syntactical connection with the rest of the sentence. {In that} (\en hi\). "Wherein." {It was weak} (\sthenei\). Imperfect active, continued weak as already shown. {In the likeness of sinful flesh} (\en homoimati sarkos hamartias\). For "likeness" see strkjv@Phillipians:2:7|, a real man, but more than man for God's "own Son." Two genitives "of flesh of sin" (marked by sin), that is the flesh of man is, but not the flesh of Jesus. {And for sin} (\kai peri hamartias\). Condensed phrase, God sent his Son also concerning sin (our sin). {Condemned sin in the flesh} (\katekrine tn hamartian en ti sarki\). First aorist active indicative of \katakrin\. He condemned the sin of men and the condemnation took place in the flesh of Jesus. If the article \tn\ had been repeated before \en ti sarki\ Paul would have affirmed sin in the flesh of Jesus, but he carefully avoided that (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 784).
rwp@Romans:8:39 @{To separate us} (\hms chrisai\). Aorist active infinitive of \choriz\ (same verb as in 35|). God's love is victor over all possible foes, "God's love that is in Christ Jesus." Paul has reached the mountain top. He has really completed his great argument concerning the God-kind of righteousness save for its bearing on some special problems. The first of these concerns the fact that the Jews (God's chosen people) have so largely rejected the gospel (chapters 9-11|).
rwp@Romans:9:5 @{Of whom} (\ex hn\). Fourth relative clause and here with \ex\ and the ablative. {Christ} (\ho Christos\). The Messiah. {As concerning the flesh} (\to kata sarka\). Accusative of general reference, "as to the according to the flesh." Paul limits the descent of Jesus from the Jews to his human side as he did in strkjv@1:3f|. {Who is over all, God blessed for ever} (\ho on epi pantn theos eulogtos\). A clear statement of the deity of Christ following the remark about his humanity. This is the natural and the obvious way of punctuating the sentence. To make a full stop after \sarka\ (or colon) and start a new sentence for the doxology is very abrupt and awkward. See strkjv@Acts:20:28; strkjv@Titus:2:13| for Paul's use of \theos\ applied to Jesus Christ.
rwp@Romans:10:8 @{But what saith it?} (\alla ti legei?\). That is "the from faith righteousness." {The word of faith} (\to rma ts pistes\). The gospel message concerning faith (objective genitive). Only here. In contrast to the law. {Which we preach} (\ho krussomen\). The living voice brings home to every one the faith kind of righteousness. Paul seizes upon the words of Moses with the orator's instinct and with rhetorical skill (Sanday and Headlam) applies them to the facts about the gospel message about the Incarnation and Resurrection of Christ.
rwp@Romans:11:25 @{This mystery} (\to mustrion touto\). Not in the pagan sense of an esoteric doctrine for the initiated (from \mue\, to blink, to wink), unknown secrets (2Thessalonians:2:7|), or like the mystery religions of the time, but the revealed will of God now made known to all (1Corinthians:2:1,7; strkjv@4:1|) which includes Gentiles also (Romans:16:25; strkjv@Colossians:1:26f.; strkjv@Ephesians:3:3f.|) and so far superior to man's wisdom (Colossians:2:2; strkjv@4:13; strkjv@Ephesians:3:9; strkjv@5:32; strkjv@6:19; strkjv@Matthew:13:11; strkjv@Mark:4:11|). Paul has covered every point of difficulty concerning the failure of the Jews to accept Jesus as the Messiah and has shown how God has overruled it for the blessing of the Gentiles with a ray of hope still held out for the Jews. "In early ecclesiastical Latin \mustrion\ was rendered by _sacramentum_, which in classical Latin means _the military oath_. The explanation of the word _sacrament_, which is so often founded on this etymology, is therefore mistaken, since the meaning of sacrament belongs to \mustrion\ and not to _sacramentum_ in the classical sense" (Vincent). {Wise in your own conceits} (\en heautois phronimoi\). "Wise in yourselves." Some MSS. read \par' heautois\ (by yourselves). Negative purpose here (\hina m te\), to prevent self-conceit on the part of the Gentiles who have believed. They had no merit in themselves {A hardening} (\prsis\). Late word from \pro\ (11:7|). Occurs in Hippocrates as a medical term, only here in N.T. save strkjv@Mark:3:5; strkjv@Ephesians:4:18|. It means obtuseness of intellectual discernment, mental dulness. {In part} (\apo merous\). Goes with the verb \gegonen\ (has happened in part). For \apo merous\, see strkjv@2Corinthians:1:14; strkjv@2:5; strkjv@Romans:15:24|; for \ana meros\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:14:27|; for \ek merous\, see strkjv@1Corinthians:12:27; strkjv@13:9|; for \kata meros\, see strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|; for \meros ti\ (adverbial accusative) partly see strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18|. Paul refuses to believe that no more Jews will be saved. {Until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in} (\achri hou to plrma tn ethnn eiselthi\). Temporal clause with \achri hou\ (until which time) and the second aorist active subjunctive of \eiserchomai\, to come in (Matthew:7:13,21|). {For fulness of the Gentiles} (\to plrma tn ethnn\) see on verse ¯12|, the complement of the Gentiles.
rwp@Romans:11:33 @{O the depth} (\O bathos\). Exclamation with omega and the nominative case of \bathos\ (see on ¯2Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Romans:8:39|). Paul's argument concerning God's elective grace and goodness has carried him to the heights and now he pauses on the edge of the precipice as he contemplates God's wisdom and knowledge, fully conscious of his inability to sound the bottom with the plummet of human reason and words. {Unsearchable} (\anexeraunta\). Double compound (\a\ privative and \ex\) verbal adjective of \ereuna\ (old spelling \-eu-\), late and rare word (LXX, Dio Cassius, Heraclitus), only here in N.T. Some of God's wisdom can be known (1:20f.|), but not all. {Past tracing out} (\anexichniastoi\). Another verbal adjective from \a\ privative and \exichniaz\, to trace out by tracks (\ichnos\ strkjv@Romans:4:12|). Late word in Job:(Job:5:9; strkjv@9:10; strkjv@34:24|) from which use Paul obtained it here and strkjv@Ephesians:3:8| (only N.T. examples). Also in ecclesiastical writers. Some of God's tracks he has left plain to us, but others are beyond us.
rwp@Romans:11:36 @{Of him} (\ex autou\), {through him} (\di' autou\), {unto him} (\eis auton\). By these three prepositions Paul ascribes the universe (\ta panta\) with all the phenomena concerning creation, redemption, providence to God as the {Source} (\ex\), the {Agent} (\di\), the {Goal} (\eis\). {For ever} (\eis tous ainas\). "For the ages." Alford terms this doxology in verses 33-36| "the sublimest apostrophe existing even in the pages of inspiration itself."
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}