OT-LAW.filter - rwp shows:
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:1:8 @{Shall confirm} (\bebaisei\). Direct reference to the same word in verse 6|. The relative \hos\ (who) points to Christ. {Unto the end} (\hes telous\). End of the age till Jesus comes, final preservation of the saints. {That ye be unreproveable} (\anegkltous\). Alpha privative and \egkale\, to accuse, old verbal, only in Paul in N.T. Proleptic adjective in the predicate accusative agreeing with \humas\ (you) without \hste\ and the infinitive as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:13; strkjv@5:23; strkjv@Phillipians:3:21|. "Unimpeachable, for none will have the right to impeach" (Robertson and Plummer) as Paul shows in strkjv@Romans:8:33; strkjv@Colossians:1:22,28|.
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:1:17 @{For Christ sent me not to baptize} (\ou gar apesteilen me Christos baptizein\). The negative \ou\ goes not with the infinitive, but with \apesteilen\ (from \apostell, apostolos\, apostle). {For Christ did not send me to be a baptizer} (present active infinitive, linear action) like John the Baptist. {But to preach the gospel} (\alla euaggelizesthai\). This is Paul's idea of his mission from Christ, as Christ's apostle, to be {a gospelizer}. This led, of course, to baptism, as a result, but Paul usually had it done by others as Peter at Caesarea ordered the baptism to be done, apparently by the six brethren with him (Acts:10:48|). Paul is fond of this late Greek verb from \euaggelion\ and sometimes uses both verb and substantive as in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:1| "the gospel which I gospelized unto you." {Not in wisdom of words} (\ouk en sophii logou\). Note \ou\, not \m\ (the subjective negative), construed with \apesteilen\ rather than the infinitive. Not in wisdom of speech (singular). Preaching was Paul's forte, but it was not as a pretentious philosopher or professional rhetorician that Paul appeared before the Corinthians (1Corinthians:2:1-5|). Some who followed Apollos may have been guilty of a fancy for external show, though Apollos was not a mere performer and juggler with words. But the Alexandrian method as in Philo did run to dialectic subtleties and luxuriant rhetoric (Lightfoot). {Lest the cross of Christ should be made void} (\hina m kenthi ho stauros tou Christou\). Negative purpose (\hina m\) with first aorist passive subjunctive, effective aorist, of \keno\, old verb from \kenos\, to make empty. In Paul's preaching the Cross of Christ is the central theme. Hence Paul did not fall into the snare of too much emphasis on baptism nor into too little on the death of Christ. "This expression shows clearly the stress which St. Paul laid on the death of Christ, not merely as a great moral spectacle, and so the crowning point of a life of self-renunciation, but as in itself the ordained instrument of salvation" (Lightfoot).
rwp@1Corinthians:2:9 @{But as it is written} (\alla kaths gegraptai\). Elliptical sentence like Rom strkjv@15:3| where \gegonen\ (it has happened) can be supplied. It is not certain where Paul derives this quotation as Scripture. Origen thought it a quotation from the _Apocalypse of Elias_ and Jerome finds it also in the _Ascension of Isaiah_. But these books appear to be post-Pauline, and Jerome denies that Paul obtained it from these late apocryphal books. Clement of Rome finds it in the LXX text of strkjv@Isaiah:64:4| and cites it as a Christian saying. It is likely that Paul here combines freely strkjv@Isaiah:64:4; strkjv@65:17; strkjv@52:15| in a sort of catena or free chain of quotations as he does in strkjv@Romans:3:10-18|. There is also an anacoluthon for \ha\ (which things) occurs as the direct object (accusative) with \eiden\ (saw) and \kousan\ (heard), but as the subject (nominative) with \aneb\ (entered, second aorist active indicative of \anabain\, to go up). {Whatsoever} (\hosa\). A climax to the preceding relative clause (Findlay). {Prepared} (\htoimasen\). First aorist active indicative of \hetoimaz\. The only instance where Paul uses this verb of God, though it occurs of final glory (Luke:2:31; strkjv@Matthew:20:23; strkjv@25:34; strkjv@Mark:10:40; strkjv@Hebrews:11:16|) and of final misery (Matthew:25:41|). But here undoubtedly the dominant idea is the present blessing to these who love God (1Corinthians:1:5-7|). {Heart} (\kardian\) here as in strkjv@Romans:1:21| is more than emotion. The Gnostics used this passage to support their teaching of esoteric doctrine as Hegesippus shows. Lightfoot thinks that probably the apocryphal _Ascension of Isaiah_ and _Apocalypse of Elias_ were Gnostic and so quoted this passage of Paul to support their position. But the next verse shows that Paul uses it of what is now {revealed} and made plain, not of mysteries still unknown.
rwp@1Corinthians:3:8 @{Are one} (\hen eisin\). The neuter singular again (\hen\, not \heis\) as with the interrogative \ti\ and the indefinite \ti\. By this bold metaphor which Paul expands he shows how the planter and the waterer work together. If no one planted, the watering would be useless. If no one watered, the planting would come to naught as the dreadful drouth of 1930 testifies while these words are written. {According to his own labour} (\kata ton idion kopon\). God will bestow to each the reward that his labour deserves. That is the pay that the preacher is sure to receive. He may get too little or too much here from men. But the due reward from God is certain and it will be adequate however ungrateful men may be.
rwp@1Corinthians:4:13 @{Being defamed we intreat} (\dusphmoumenoi parakaloumen\). The participle \dusphmoumenoi\ is an old verb (in I Macc. strkjv@7:41) to use ill, from \dusphmos\, but occurs here only in the N.T. Paul is opening his very heart now after the keen irony above. {As the filth of the world} (\hs perikatharmata tou kosmou\). Literally, sweepings, rinsings, cleansings around, dust from the floor, from \perikathair\, to cleanse all around (Plato and Aristotle) and so the refuse thrown off in cleansing. Here only in the N.T. and only twice elsewhere. \Katharma\ was the refuse of a sacrifice. In strkjv@Proverbs:21:18| \perikatharma\ occurs for the scapegoat. The other example is Epictetus iii. 22,78, in the same sense of an expiatory offering of a worthless fellow. It was the custom in Athens during a plague to throw to the sea some wretch in the hope of appeasing the gods. One hesitates to take it so here in Paul, though Findlay thinks that possibly in Ephesus Paul may have heard some such cry like that in the later martyrdoms _Christiani ad leones_. At any rate in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:32| Paul says "I fought with wild beasts" and in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:9| "I had the answer of death." Some terrible experience may be alluded to here. The word shows the contempt of the Ephesian populace for Paul as is shown in strkjv@Acts:19:23-41| under the influence of Demetrius and the craftsmen. {The offscouring of all things} (\pantn peripsma\). Late word, here only in N.T., though in Tob. strkjv@5:18. The word was used in a formula at Athens when victims were flung into the sea, \peripsma hmn genou\ (Became a \peripsma\ for us), in the sense of expiation. The word merely means scraping around from \peripsa\, offscrapings or refuse. That is probably the idea here as in Tob. strkjv@5:18. It came to have a complimentary sense for the Christians who in a plague gave their lives for the sick. But it is a bold figure here with Paul of a piece with \perikatharmata\.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:13 @{But God shall bring to nought both it and them} (\ho de theos kai tautn kai tauta katargsei\). Another proverb about the adaptation of the belly (\koilia\) and food (\brmata\, not just flesh), which had apparently been used by some in Corinth to justify sexual license (fornication and adultery). These Gentiles mixed up matters not alike at all (questions of food and sensuality). " We have traces of this gross moral confusion in the circumstances which dictated the Apostolic Letter (Acts:15:23-29|), where things wholly diverse are combined, as directions about meats to be avoided and a prohibition of fornication" (Lightfoot). Both the belly (\tautn\) and the foods (\tauta\) God will bring to an end by death and change. {But the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body} (\to de sma ou ti porneii alla ti kurii, kai ho kurios ti smati\). Paul here boldly shows the fallacy in the parallel about appetite of the belly for food. The human body has a higher mission than the mere gratification of sensual appetite. Sex is of God for the propagation of the race, not for prostitution. Paul had already stated that God dwells in us as the sanctuary of the Holy Spirit (3:16f.|). This higher function of the body he here puts forward against the debased Greek philosophy of the time which ignored completely Paul's idea, "the body for the Lord and the Lord for the body" (dative of personal interest in both cases). "The Lord Jesus and \porneia\ contested for the bodies of Christian men; loyal to him they must renounce _that_, yielding to _that_ they renounce him" (Findlay).
rwp@1Corinthians:7:10 @{To the married} (\tois gegamkosin\). Perfect active participle of \game\, old verb, to marry, and still married as the tense shows. {I give charge} (\paraggell\). Not mere wish as in verses 7,8|. {Not I, but the Lord} (\ouk eg alla ho kurios\). Paul had no commands from Jesus to the unmarried (men or women), but Jesus had spoken to the married (husbands and wives) as in strkjv@Matthew:5:31f.; strkjv@19:3-12; strkjv@Mark:10:9-12; strkjv@Luke:16:18|. The Master had spoken plain words about divorce. Paul reenforces his own inspired command by the command of Jesus. In strkjv@Mark:10:9| we have from Christ: "What therefore God joined together let not man put asunder" (\m chorizet\). {That the wife depart not from her husband} (\gunaika apo andros m choristhnai\). First aorist passive infinitive (indirect command after \paraggell\) of \choriz\, old verb from adverbial preposition \chris\, separately, apart from, from. Here used of divorce by the wife which, though unusual then, yet did happen as in the case of Salome (sister of Herod the Great) and of Herodias before she married Herod Antipas. Jesus also spoke of it (Mark:10:12|). Now most of the divorces are obtained by women. This passive infinitive is almost reflexive in force according to a constant tendency in the _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 817).
rwp@1Corinthians:10:4 @{For they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them} (\epinon ek pneumatiks akolouthouss petras\). Change to the imperfect \epinon\ shows their continual access to the supernatural source of supply. The Israelites were blessed by the water from the rock that Moses smote at Rephidim (Exodus:17:6|) and at Kadesh (Numbers:20:11|) and by the well of Beer (Numbers:21:16|). The rabbis had a legend that the water actually followed the Israelites for forty years, in one form a fragment of rock fifteen feet high that followed the people and gushed out water. Baur and some other scholars think that Paul adopts this "Rabbinical legend that the water-bearing Rephidim rock journeyed onwards with the Israelites" (Findlay). That is hard to believe, though it is quite possible that Paul alludes to this fancy and gives it a spiritual turn as a type of Christ in allegorical fashion. Paul knew the views of the rabbis and made use of allegory on occasion (Galatians:4:24|). {And the rock was Christ} (\h petra de n ho Christos\). He definitely states here in symbolic form the preexistence of Christ. But surely "we must not disgrace Paul by making him say that the pre-incarnate Christ followed the march of Israel in the shape of a lump of rock" (Hofmann). He does mean that Christ was the source of the water which saved the Israelites from perishing (Robertson and Plummer) as he is the source of supply for us today.
rwp@Info_1John @ GNOSTICISM The Epistle is not a polemic primarily, but a letter for the edification of the readers in the truth and the life in Christ. And yet the errors of the Gnostics are constantly before John's mind. The leaders had gone out from among the true Christians, but there was an atmosphere of sympathy that constituted a subtle danger. There are only two passages (1John:2:18f.; strkjv@4:1-6|) in which the false teachers are specifically denounced, but "this unethical intellectualism" (Robert Law) with its dash of Greek culture and Oriental mysticism and licentiousness gave a curious attraction for many who did not know how to think clearly. John, like Paul in Colossians, Ephesians, and the Pastoral Epistles, foresaw this dire peril to Christianity. In the second century it gave pure Christianity a gigantic struggle. "The great Gnostics were the first Christian philosophers" (Robert Law, _The Tests of Life_, p. 27) and threatened to undermine the Gospel message by "deifying the devil" (ib., p. 31) along with dethroning Christ. There were two kinds of Gnostics, both agreeing in the essential evil of matter. Both had trouble with the Person of Christ. The Docetic Gnostics denied the actual humanity of Christ, the Cerinthian Gnostics distinguished between the man Jesus and the \aeon\ Christ that came on him at his baptism and left him on the Cross. Some practised asceticism, some licentiousness. John opposes both classes in his Epistles. They claimed superior knowledge (\gnsis\) and so were called Gnostics (\Gnstikoi\). Nine times John gives tests for knowing the truth and uses the verb \ginsk\ (know) each time (1John:2:3,5; strkjv@3:16,19,24; strkjv@4:2,6,13; strkjv@5:2|). Some of the leaders he calls antichrists. There are stories about John's dread of Cerinthus and his unwillingness to be seen in the same public bath with him. The Apostle of love, as he is, is a real son of thunder when Gnosticism shows its head. Westcott thinks that the Fourth Gospel was written to prove the deity of Christ, assuming his humanity, while I John was written to prove the humanity of Christ, assuming his deity. Certainly both ideas appear in both books.
rwp@Info_1John @ THE DATE The time seems to be considerably removed from the atmosphere of the Pauline and Petrine Epistles. Jerusalem has been destroyed. If John wrote the Fourth Gospel by A.D. 95, then the First Epistle would come anywhere from A.D. 85 to 95. The tone of the author is that of an old man. His urgent message that the disciples, his "little children," love one another is like another story about the aged John, who, when too feeble to stand, would sit in his chair and preach "Little children, love one another." The Muratorian Fragment accepts the First Epistle and Origen makes full use of it, as does Clement of Alexandria. Irenaeus quotes it by name. Polycarp shows knowledge of it also.
rwp@1John:2:13 @{Fathers} (\pateres\). Those mature believers with long and rich experience (\egnkate\, ye have come to know and still know). {Him which is from the beginning} (\ton ap' archs\). See strkjv@1:1| as explaining this crisp description of the Word of life (cf. strkjv@John:1:1-18|). {Young men} (\neaniskoi\). The younger element in contrast to the fathers, full of vigor and conflict and victory. {Ye have overcome the evil one} (\nenikkate ton ponron\). Perfect active indicative of \nika\, a permanent victory after conflict. The masculine article \ton\ shows that the prince of darkness is the one defeated in this struggle, the devil plain in strkjv@3:8,10| (John:8:44; strkjv@13:2|).
rwp@1John:3:8 @{He that doeth sin} (\ho poin tn hamartian\). "He that keeps on doing sin" (the habit of sin). {Of the devil} (\ek tou diabolou\). In spiritual parentage as Jesus said of the Pharisees in strkjv@John:8:44|. When one acts like the devil he shows that he is not a true child of God. {Sinneth from the beginning} (\ap' archs hamartanei\). Linear progressive present active indicative, "he has been sinning from the beginning" of his career as the devil. This is his normal life and those who imitate him become his spiritual children. {That he might destroy} (\hina lusi\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and the first aorist active subjunctive of \lu\. This purpose (\eis touto\) Jesus had and has. There is eternal conflict, with final victory over Satan certain.
rwp@1John:4:16 @{We know} (\egnkamen\). Perfect active indicative, "we have come to know and still know" as in strkjv@John:6:9|, only there order is changed (\pepisteukamen\ coming before \egnkamen\). Confession (\homologe\) follows experimental knowledge (\ginsk\) and confident trust (\pisteu\). Believers are the sphere (\en hmin\, in our case) in which the love of God operates (Westcott). See strkjv@John:13:35| for "having love." {God is love} (\ho theos agap estin\). Repeated from verse 8|. Songs:he gathers up the whole argument that one who is abiding in love is abiding in God and shows that God is abiding in him. Thoroughly Johannine style.
rwp@Info_1Peter @ THE PERSECUTION PICTURED IN THE EPISTLE Peter himself knew what persecution was at the hands of the Sanhedrin and of Herod Agrippa I (both church and state). If First Peter was written A.D. 65, there was time enough for the persecution of Nero in Rome in A.D. 64 to spread to Asia Minor. The province easily imitated the capital city. Paul's life in the Acts and his Epistles abundantly show how early persecution arose in Asia Minor. The Apocalypse, written during the reign of Domitian, shows that persecution from the state had been on hand long before and was an old burden. We know too little of the history of Christianity in Asia Minor from A.D. 60 to 70 to deny that the fiery trials and suffering as a Christian (1Peter:4:16|) can be true of this period. Songs:we locate the persecution at this time as an echo from Rome.
rwp@1Peter:2:5 @{Ye also as living stones} (\kai autoi hs lithoi zntes\). Peter applies the metaphor about Christ as the living stone to the readers, "ye yourselves also." {Are built up a spiritual house} (\oikodomeisthe oikos pneumatikos\). Present passive indicative second person plural of \oikodome\, the very verb used by Jesus to Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| (\oikodoms\) of building his church on the rock. If the metaphor of a house of living stones seems "violent" (Vincent), it should be remembered that Jesus employed the figure of a house of believers. Peter just carried it a bit farther and Paul uses a temple for believers in one place (1Corinthians:3:16|) and for the kingdom of God in general (Ephesians:2:22|), as does the author of Hebrews (Hebrews:3:6|). This "spiritual house" includes believers in the five Roman provinces of strkjv@1:1| and shows clearly how Peter understood the metaphor of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| to be not a local church, but the church general (the kingdom of Christ). {To be a holy priesthood} (\eis hierateuma hagion\). Late word (from \hierateu\, to serve as priest, strkjv@Luke:1:8| alone in N.T.), in LXX (Exodus:19:6|), in N.T. only here and verse 9|, either the office of priest (Hort) or an order or body of priests. At any rate, Peter has the same idea of Rev strkjv@1:6| (\hiereis\, priests) that all believers are priests (Hebrews:4:16|) and can approach God directly. {To offer up} (\anenegkai\). First aorist active infinitive (of purpose here) of \anapher\, the usual word for offering sacrifices (Hebrews:7:27|). Only these are "spiritual" (\pneumatikas\) as pictured also in strkjv@Hebrews:13:15f|. {Acceptable} (\euprosdektous\). Late (Plutarch) double compound verbal adjective (\eu, pros, dechomai\) as in strkjv@2Corinthians:6:2|.
rwp@1Peter:5:5 @{Be subject} (\hopotagte\). Second aorist passive imperative of \hupotass\. {Unto the elder} (\presbuterois\). Dative case. Here the antithesis between younger and elder shows that the word refers to age, not to office as in strkjv@5:1|. See a like change in meaning in strkjv@1Timothy:5:1,17|. {All} (\pantes\). All ages, sexes, classes. {Gird yourselves with humility} (\tn tapeinophrosunn egkombsasthe\). First aorist middle imperative of \egkomboomai\, late and rare verb (in Apollodorus, fourth cent. B.C.), here only in N.T., from \en\ and \kombos\ (knot, like the knot of a girdle). \Egkombma\ was the white scarf or apron of slaves. It is quite probable that Peter here is thinking of what Jesus did (John:13:4ff.|) when he girded himself with a towel and taught the disciples, Peter in particular (John:13:9ff.|), the lesson of humility (John:13:15|). Peter had at last learned the lesson (John:21:15-19|). {The proud} (\huperphanois\). Dative plural of \huperphanos\ (James:4:6; strkjv@Romans:1:30|) after \antitassetai\ (present middle indicative of \antitass\ as in strkjv@James:4:6| (quoted there as here from strkjv@Proverbs:3:34|).
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:2 @{But having suffered before} (\alla propathontes\). Strong adversative \alla\, antithesis to \ken\. Appeal to his personal experiences in Thessalonica known to them ({as ye know}, \kaths oidate\). Second aorist active participle of \propasch\, old compound verb, but here alone in the N.T. The force of \pro-\ (before) is carried over to the next verb. The participle may be regarded as temporal (Ellicott) or concessive (Moffatt). {And been shamefully entreated in Philippi} (\kai hubristhentes en Philippois\). First aorist passive participle of \hubriz\, old verb, to treat insolently. "More than the bodily suffering it was the personal indignity that had been offered to him as a Roman citizen" (Milligan), for which account see strkjv@Acts:16:16-40|, an interesting example of how Acts and the Epistles throw light on each other. Luke tells how Paul resented the treatment accorded to him as a Roman citizen and here Paul shows that the memory still rankled in his bosom. {We waxed bold in our God} (\eparrsiasametha en ti thei hmn\). Ingressive first aorist middle of \parrsiazomai\, old deponent verb from \parrsia\ (full story, \pan-, rsia\). In his reply to Festus (Acts:26:26|) Paul uses \parrsiazomenos lal\, {being bold I speak}, while here he has {we waxed bold to speak} (\eparrsiasametha lalsai\). The insult in Philippi did not close Paul's mouth, but had precisely the opposite effect "in our God." It was not wild fanaticism, but determined courage and confidence in God that spurred Paul to still greater boldness in Thessalonica, {unto you} (\pros hums\), be the consequences what they might, {the gospel of God in much conflict}, (\to euaggelion tou theou en polli agni\). This figure of the athletic games (\agn\) may refer to outward conflict like strkjv@Phillipians:1:30| or inward anxiety (Colossians:2:1|). He had both in Thessalonica.
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:15 @{Who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets} (\tn kai ton Kurion apokteinantn Isoun kai tous prophtas\). First aorist active participle of \apoktein\. Vivid justification of his praise of the churches in Judea. The Jews killed the prophets before the Lord Jesus who reminded them of their guilt (Matthew:23:29|). Paul, as Peter (Acts:2:23|), lays the guilt of the death of Christ on the Jews. {And drove us out} (\kai hms ekdixantn\). An old verb to drive out or banish, to chase out as if a wild beast. Only here in N.T. It is Paul's vivid description of the scene told in strkjv@Acts:17:5ff.| when the rabbis and the hoodlums from the agora chased him out of Thessalonica by the help of the politarchs. {Please not God} (\Thei m areskontn\). The rabbis and Jews thought that they were pleasing God by so doing as Paul did when he ravaged the young church in Jerusalem. But Paul knows better now. {And are contrary to all men} (\kai pasin anthrpois enantin\). Dative case with the adjective \enantin\ (old and common word, face to face, opposite). It seems like a bitter word about Paul's countrymen whom he really loved (Romans:9:1-5; strkjv@10:1-6|), but Paul knew only too well the middle wall of partition between Jew and Gentile as he shows in strkjv@Ephesians:2| and which only the Cross of Christ can break down. Tacitus (_Hist_. V. 5) says that the Jews are _adversus omnes alios hostile odium_.
rwp@1Thessalonians:4:15 @{By the word of the Lord} (\en logi Kuriou\). We do not know to what word of the Lord Jesus Paul refers, probably Paul meaning only the point in the teaching of Christ rather than a quotation. He may be claiming a direct revelation on this important matter as about the Lord's Supper in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:23|. Jesus may have spoken on this subject though it has not been preserved to us (cf. strkjv@Mark:9:1|). {Ye that are alive} (\hmeis hoi zntes\). Paul here includes himself, but this by no means shows that Paul knew that he would be alive at the Parousia of Christ. He was alive, not dead, when he wrote. {Shall in no wise precede} (\ou m phthasmen\). Second aorist active subjunctive of \phthan\, to come before, to anticipate. This strong negative with \ou m\ (double negative) and the subjunctive is the regular idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 929). Hence there was no ground for uneasiness about the dead in Christ.
rwp@1Thessalonians:5:21 @{Prove all things} (\panta [de] dokimazete\). Probably \de\ (but) is genuine. Even the gift of prophecy has to be tested (1Corinthians:12:10; strkjv@14:29|) to avoid error. Paul shows fine balance here. {Hold fast that which is good} (\to kalon katechete\). Keep on holding down the beautiful (noble, morally beautiful). Present imperative \kat-ech\ (perfective use of \kata-\ here).
rwp@1Timothy:5:21 @{The elect angels} (\tn eklektn aggeln\). For this triad of God, Christ, angels, see strkjv@Luke:9:26|. "Elect" in the sense of the "holy" angels who kept their own principality (Jude:1:6|) and who did not sin (2Peter:2:4|). Paul shows his interest in angels in strkjv@1Corinthians:4:9; strkjv@11:10|. {Observe} (\phulaxis\). First aorist active subjunctive of \phulass\, to guard, to keep (Romans:2:26|). Subfinal use of \hina\. {Without prejudice} (\chris prokrimatos\). Late and rare word (from \prokin\, to judge beforehand), three times in the papyri, here only in N.T. "Without prejudgment." {By partiality} (\kata prosklisin\). Late word from \prosklin\, to incline towards one (Acts:5:36|), only here in N.T.
rwp@Info_2Corinthians @ It is clear therefore that Paul wrote what we call I Corinthians in a disturbed state of mind. He had founded the church there, had spent two years there (Acts:18|), and took pardonable pride in his work there as a wise architect (1Corinthians:3:10|) for he had built the church on Christ as the foundation. He was anxious that his work should abide. It is plain that the disturbances in the church in Corinth were fomented from without by the Judaizers whom Paul had defeated at the Jerusalem Conference (Acts:15:1-35; strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10|). They were overwhelmed there, but renewed their attacks in Antioch (Galatians:2:11-21|). Henceforth throughout the second mission tour they are a disturbing element in Galatia, in Corinth, in Jerusalem. While Paul is winning the Gentiles in the Roman Empire to Christ, these Judaizers are trying to win Paul's converts to Judaism. Nowhere do we see the conflict at so white a heat as in Corinth. Paul finally will expose them with withering sarcasm (2Corinthians:10-13|) as Jesus did the Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23| on that last day in the temple. Factional strife, immorality, perverted ideas about marriage, spiritual gifts, and the resurrection, these complicated problems are a vivid picture of church life in our cities today. The discussion of them shows Paul's manysidedness and also the powerful grasp that he has upon the realities of the gospel. Questions of casuistry are faced fairly and serious ethical issues are met squarely. But along with the treatment of these vexed matters Paul sings the noblest song of the ages on love (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13|) and writes the classic discussion on the resurrection (chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:15|). If one knows clearly and fully the Corinthian Epistles and Paul's dealings with Corinth, he has an understanding of a large section of his life and ministry. No church caused him more anxiety than did Corinth (2Corinthians:11:28|).
rwp@2Corinthians:1:14 @{As also ye did acknowledge us in part} (\kaths kai epegnte hmas apo merous\). Gracious acknowledgment (second aorist active indicative of \epignsk\) to the original Pauline party (1Corinthians:1:12; strkjv@3:4|) that he had seemed to care so little for them. And now in his hour of victory he shows that, if he is their ground of glorying, they are his also (cf. strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:19f.; strkjv@Phillipians:2:16|).
rwp@2Corinthians:1:21 @{Establishes} (\bebain\). Present active participle from \bebaios\, firm. An apt metaphor in Corinth where confirmation of a bargain often took place (\bebaisis\) as Deissmann shows (_Bible Studies_, p. 109) and as verse 22| makes plain. {Anointed} (\chrisas\). From \chri\, to anoint, old verb, to consecrate, with the Holy Spirit here as in strkjv@1John:2:20|.
rwp@2Corinthians:2:2 @{Who then?} (\kai tis?\). For this use of \kai\ see on ¯Mark:10:26; strkjv@John:9:36|. The \kai\ accepts the condition (first class \ei--lup\) and shows the paradox that follows. \Lupe\ is old word from \lup\ (sorrow) in causative sense, to make sorry. {Maketh glad} (\euphrainn\). Present active participle of old word from \eu\, well, and \phrn\, mind, to make joyful, causative idea like \lupe\.
rwp@2Corinthians:2:5 @{If any} (\ei tis\). Scholars disagree whether Paul refers to strkjv@1Corinthians:5:1|, where he also employs \tis, toioutos\, and \Satans\ as here, or to the ringleader of the opposition to him. Either view is possible. In both cases Paul shows delicacy of feeling by not mentioning the name. {But in part} (\alla apo merous\). "But to some extent to you all." The whole Corinthian Church has been injured in part by this man's wrongdoing. There is a parenthesis ({that I press not too heavily}, \hina m epibar\) that interrupts the flow of ideas. \Epibare\, to put a burden on (\epi, baros\), is a late word, only in Paul in N.T. (here and strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:9; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:8|). He does not wish to give pain by too severe language.
rwp@2Corinthians:4:13 @{According to that which is written} (\kata to gegrammenon\). This formula in legal documents in the papyri (_Bible Studies_, p. 250). Paul makes adaptation of the words in strkjv@Psalms:95:1|. {We also believe} (\kai hmeis pisteuomen\). Like the Psalmist. And therefore can speak with effect. Otherwise useless. {Shall present us with you} (\kai parastsei sun hmin\). This shows that Paul was not certain that he would be alive when Jesus comes as has been wrongly inferred from strkjv@1Corinthians:7:29; strkjv@10:11; strkjv@15:51|.
rwp@2Corinthians:5:9 @{We make it our aim} (\philotimoumetha\). Old and common verb, present middle, from \philotimos\ (\philos, tim\, fond of honour), to act from love of honour, to be ambitious in the good sense (1Thessalonians:4:11; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:9; strkjv@Romans:15:20|). The Latin _ambitio_ has a bad sense from _ambire_, to go both ways to gain one's point. {To be well-pleasing to him} (\euarestoi auti einai\). Late adjective that shows Paul's loyalty to Christ, his Captain. Found in several inscriptions in the _Koin_ period (Deissmann, _Bible Studies_, p. 214; Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_).
rwp@2Corinthians:6:11 @{Our mouth is open unto you} (\to stoma hmn aneigen pros humas\). Second perfect active indicative of \anoig\ and intransitive, stand open. He has kept back nothing in his portrayal of the glory of the ministry as the picture of the open mouth shows. {Our heart is enlarged} (\h kardia hmn peplatuntai\). Perfect passive indicative of old verb \platun\, to broaden, from \platus\, broad. In N T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:23:5| (cf. phylacteries). Hence his freedom of speech for "out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks" (Matthew:12:34|).
rwp@2Corinthians:9:7 @{He hath purposed} (\proirtai\). Perfect middle indicative of \proaireomai\, to choose beforehand, old verb, here only in N.T. Permanent purpose also. {Not grudgingly} (\m ek lups\). The use of \m\ rather than \ou\ shows that the imperative \poieit\ (do) or \didot\ (give) is to be supplied. Not give as out of sorrow. {Or of necessity} (\ ex anagks\). As if it were like pulling eye-teeth. {For God loveth a cheerful giver} (\hilaron gar dotn agapi ho theos\). Our word "hilarious" comes from \hilaron\ which is from \hilaos\ (propitious), an old and common adjective, only here in N.T.
rwp@2Corinthians:9:8 @{Is able} (\dunatei\). Late verb, not found except here; strkjv@13:3; strkjv@Romans:14:4|. Songs:far a Pauline word made from \dunatos\, able. {All sufficiency} (\psan autarkeian\). Old word from \autarks\ (Phillipians:4:11|), common word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Timothy:6:6|). The use of this word shows Paul's acquaintance with Stoicism. Paul takes this word of Greek philosophy and applies it to the Christian view of life as independent of circumstances. But he does not accept the view of the Cynics in the avoidance of society. Note threefold use of "all" here (\en panti, pantote, psan\, in everything, always, all sufficiency).
rwp@2Corinthians:9:10 @{Supplieth} (\epichorgn\). Late _Koin_ compound verb from \epi\ and \chorge\, just below (1Peter:4:11|). \Chorgos\ is old word for leader of a chorus (\choros, hgeomai\) or chorus-leader. The verb means to furnish a chorus at one's own expense, then to supply in general. N.T. examples of \epichorge\ are strkjv@2Corinthians:9:10; strkjv@Galatians:3:15; strkjv@Colossians:2:19; strkjv@2Peter:1:5|. {Shall multiply} (\plthunei\). Future active indicative of \plthun\, old verb from \plthus\, fulness. Cf. strkjv@Acts:6:1|. {Fruits} (\genmata\). Correct reading (from \ginomai\, to become) and not \gennmata\ (from \genna\, to beget). This spelling is supported by LXX where Thackeray shows that \genmata\ in LXX refers to vegetables and \gennmata\ to animals. The papyri support this distinction (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_).
rwp@2Corinthians:10:1 @{Now I Paul myself} (\Autos de eg Paulos\). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:5:2|. Paul now turns to the third part of the epistle in chapters 10-13| in which he vigorously defends himself against the accusations of the stubborn minority of Judaizers in Corinth. Great ministers of Christ through the ages have had to pass through fiery trials like these. Paul has shown the way for us all. He speaks of himself now plainly, but under compulsion, as is clear. It may be that at this point he took the pen from the amanuensis and wrote himself as in strkjv@Galatians:6:11|. {By the meekness and gentleness of Christ} (\dia tes prauttos kai epieikias tou Christou\). This appeal shows (Plummer) that Paul had spoken to the Corinthians about the character of Christ. Jesus claimed meekness for himself (Matthew:11:29|) and felicitated the meek (Matthew:5:5|) and he exemplified it abundantly (Luke:23:34|). See on ¯Matthew:5:15; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:21| for this great word that has worn thin with us. Plutarch combines \prauts\ with \epieikia\ as Paul does here. Matthew Arnold suggested "sweet reasonableness" for \epieikeia\ in Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch. It is in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:24:4| (\to epieikes\ in strkjv@Phillipians:4:5|). In Greek Ethics the equitable man was called \epieiks\, a man who does not press for the last farthing of his rights (Bernard). {Lowly among you} (\tapeinos en humin\). The bad use of \tapeinos\, the old use, but here alone in N.T. in that meaning. Socrates and Aristotle used it for littleness of soul. Probably Paul here is quoting one of the sneers of his traducers in Corinth about his humble conduct while with them (1Corinthians:2:23; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:6|) and his boldness (\apn tharr\) when away (1Corinthians:7:16|). "It was easy to satirize and misrepresent a depression of spirits, a humility of demeanour, which were either the direct results of some bodily affliction, or which the consciousness of this affliction had rendered habitual" (Farrar). The words stung Paul to the quick.
rwp@2Corinthians:11:21 @{By way of disparagement} (\kata atimian\). Intense irony. Cf. strkjv@6:8|. {As though} (\hs hoti\). Presented as the charge of another. "They more than tolerate those who trample on them while they criticize as 'weak' one who shows them great consideration" (Plummer). After these prolonged explanations Paul "changes his tone from irony to direct and masterful assertion" (Bernard). {I am bold also} (\tolm kag\). Real courage. Cf. strkjv@10:2,12|.
rwp@2Peter:1:20 @{Knowing this first} (\touto prton ginskontes\). Agreeing with \poieite\ like \prosechontes\ in verse 19|. {No prophecy of Scripture} (\psa prophteia ou\). Like the Hebrew _lo-kl_, but also in the papyri as in strkjv@1John:2:21| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 753). {Is} (\ginetai\). Rather "comes," "springs" (Alford), not "is" (\estin\). {Of private interpretation} (\idias epiluses\). Ablative case of origin or source in the predicate as with \gnms\ in strkjv@Acts:20:3| and with \tou theou\ and \ex hmn\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:7|. "No prophecy of Scripture comes out of private disclosure," not "of private interpretation." The usual meaning of \epilusis\ is explanation, but the word does not occur elsewhere in the N.T. It occurs in the papyri in the sense of solution and even of discharge of a debt. Spitta urges "dissolved" as the idea here. The verb \epilu\, to unloose, to untie, to release, occurs twice in the N.T., once (Mark:4:34|) where it can mean "disclose" about parables, the other (Acts:19:39|) where it means to decide. It is the prophet's grasp of the prophecy, not that of the readers that is here presented, as the next verse shows.
rwp@2Peter:2:22 @{It has happened} (\sumbebken\). Perfect active indicative of \sumbain\, for which see strkjv@1Peter:4:12|. {According to the true proverb} (\to ts althous paroimias\). "The word (\to\ used absolutely, the matter of, as in strkjv@Matthew:21:21; strkjv@James:4:14|) of the true proverb" (\paroimia\ a wayside saying, for which see strkjv@John:10:6; strkjv@16:25,29|). The first proverb here given comes from strkjv@Proverbs:26:11|. \Exerama\ is a late and rare word (here only in N.T., in Diosc. and Eustath.) from \exera\, to vomit. {The sow that had washed} (\hs lousamen\). \Hs\, old word for hog, here only in N.T. Participle first aorist direct middle of \lou\ shows that it is feminine (anarthrous). This second proverb does not occur in the O.T., probably from a Gentile source because about the habit of hogs. Epictetus and other writers moralize on the habit of hogs, having once bathed in a filthy mud-hole, to delight in it. {To wallowing} (\eis kulismon\). "To rolling." Late and rare word (from \kuli\, strkjv@Mark:9:20|), here only in N.T. {In the mire} (\borborou\). Objective genitive, old word for dung, mire, here only in N.T. J. Rendel Harris (_Story of Ahikar_, p. LXVII) tells of a story about a hog that went to the bath with people of quality, but on coming out saw a stinking drain and went and rolled himself in it.
rwp@2Timothy:2:8 @{Risen from the dead} (\eggermenon ek nekrn\). Perfect passive participle of \egeir\, still risen as the perfect tense shows in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:4,12-20|. Predicate accusative. "Remember Jesus Christ as risen from the dead." This is the cardinal fact about Christ that proves his claim to be the Messiah, the Son of God. Christ is central for Paul here as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. {Of the seed of David} (\ek spermatos Daueid\). The humanity of Christ as in strkjv@Romans:1:3; strkjv@Phillipians:2:7f|. {According to my gospel} (\kata to euaggelion mou\). Paul's very phrase in strkjv@Romans:2:16; strkjv@16:25|. Not a written gospel, but my message. See also strkjv@1Corinthians:15:1; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:7; strkjv@Galatians:1:11; strkjv@2:2; strkjv@1Timothy:1:11|.
rwp@3John:1:5 @{A faithful work} (\piston\). Either thus or "thou makest sure," after an example in Xenophon quoted by Wettstein (\poiein pista\) and parallel to \kaina poie\ in strkjv@Revelation:21:5|. But it is not certain. {In whatsoever thou doest} (\ho ean ergasi\). Indefinite relative with modal \ean\ (=\an\) and the first aorist middle subjunctive of \ergazomai\. See strkjv@Colossians:3:23| for both \poie\ and \ergazomai\ in the same sentence. {And strangers withal} (\kai touto xenous\). "And that too" (accusative of general reference as in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:6; strkjv@Phillipians:1:28; strkjv@Ephesians:2:8|). This praise of hospitality (Romans:12:13; strkjv@1Peter:4:9; strkjv@1Timothy:3:2; strkjv@5:10; strkjv@Titus:1:8; strkjv@Hebrews:13:2|) shows that in strkjv@2John:1:10| John has a peculiar case in mind.
rwp@3John:1:9 @{I wrote somewhat unto the church} (\egrapsa ti ti ekklsii\). A few MSS. add \an\ to indicate that he had not written (conclusion of second-class condition), clearly spurious. Not epistolary aorist nor a reference to II John as Findlay holds, but an allusion to a brief letter of commendation (Acts:18:27; strkjv@2Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@Colossians:4:10|) sent along with the brethren in verses 5-7| or to some other itinerant brethren. Westcott wrongly thinks that \ti\ is never used of anything important in the N.T. (Acts:8:9; strkjv@Galatians:6:3|), and hence that this lost letter was unimportant. It may have been brief and a mere introduction. \Diotrephes\ (\Dios\ and \treph\, nourished by Zeus). This ambitious leader and sympathiser with the Gnostics would probably prevent the letter referred to being read to the church, whether it was II John condemning the Gnostics or another letter commending Demetrius and John's missionaries. Hence he sends Gaius this personal letter warning against Diotrephes. {Who loveth to have the preeminence among them} (\ho philoprteun autn\). Present active articular participle of a late verb, so far found only here and in ecclesiastical writers (the example cited by Blass being an error, Deissmann, _Light_ etc., p. 76), from \philoprtos\, fond of being first (Plutarch), and made like \philopone\ (papyri), to be fond of toil. This ambition of Diotrephes does not prove that he was a bishop over elders, as was true in the second century (as Ignatius shows). He may have been an elder (bishop) or deacon, but clearly desired to rule the whole church. Some forty years ago I wrote an article on Diotrephes for a denominational paper. The editor told me that twenty-five deacons stopped the paper to show their resentment against being personally attacked in the paper. {Receiveth us not} (\ouk epidechetai hms\). Present active indicative of this old compound, in N.T. only here and verse 10|. Diotrephes refused to accept John's authority or those who sided with him, John's missionaries or delegates (cf. strkjv@Matthew:10:40|).
rwp@Acts:13:1 @{In the church that was there} (\kata tn ousan ekklsian\). Possibly distributed throughout the church (note "in the church" strkjv@11:26|). Now a strong organization there. Luke here begins the second part of Acts with Antioch as the centre of operations, no longer Jerusalem. Paul is now the central figure instead of Peter. Jerusalem had hesitated too long to carry out the command of Jesus to take the gospel to the whole world. That glory will now belong to Antioch. {Prophets and teachers} (\prophtai kai didaskaloi\). All prophets were teachers, but not all teachers were prophets who were for-speakers of God, sometimes fore-speakers like Agabus in strkjv@11:28|. The double use of \te\ here makes three prophets (Barnabas, Symeon, Lucius) and two teachers (Manaen and Saul). Barnabas heads the list (11:22|) and Saul comes last. Symeon Niger may be the Simon of Cyrene who carried the Saviour's cross. Lucius of Cyrene was probably one of the original evangelists (11:20|). The name is one of the forms of Luke, but it is certainly not Luke the Physician. Manaen shows how the gospel was reaching some of the higher classes (home of Herod Antipas). {Foster-brother} (\suntrophos\). Old word for nourished with or brought up with one _collactaneus_ (Vulgate). These are clearly the outstanding men in the great Greek church in Antioch.
rwp@Acts:13:12 @{Believed} (\episteusen\). Ingressive aorist active indicative. Renan considers it impossible that a Roman proconsul could be converted by a miracle. But it was the teaching about the Lord (\tou kuriou\, objective genitive) by which he was astonished (\ekplssomenos\, present passive participle of \ekplss\, see on ¯Matthew:7:28|) or struck out as well as by the miracle. The blindness came "immediately" (\paraehrma\) upon the judgment pronounced by Paul. It is possible that Sergius Paulus was converted to Christ without openly identifying himself with the Christians as his baptism is not mentioned as in the case of Cornelius. But, even if he was baptized, he need not have been deposed from his proconsulship as Furneaux and Rackham argue because his office called for "official patronage of idolatrous worship." But that could have been merely perfunctory as it probably was already. He had been a disciple of the Jewish magician, Elymas Barjesus, without losing his position. Imperial persecution against Christianity had not yet begun. Furneaux even suggests that the conversion of a proconsul to Christianity at this stage would have called for mention by the Roman and Greek historians. There is the name Sergia Paullina in a Christian cemetery in Rome which shows that one of his family was a Christian later. One will believe what he wills about Sergius Paulus, but I do not see that Luke leaves him in the category of Simon Magus who "believed" (8:13|) for revenue only.
rwp@Acts:13:36 @{His own generation} (\idii genei\). Either locative case, "in his own generation" or dative object of \hupretsas\ (served). {The counsel of God} (\ti tou theou bouli\). Songs:here, either the dative, the object of \hupretsas\ if \genei\ is locative, or the instrumental case "by the counsel of God" which again may be construed either with \hupretsas\ (having served) or after \ekoimth\ (fell on sleep). Either of the three ways is grammatical and makes good sense. \Koimaomai\ for death we have already had (Acts:7:60|). Songs:Jesus (John:11:11|) and Paul (1Corinthians:15:6,51|). {Was laid} (\proseteth\). Was added unto (first aorist passive indicative of \prostithmi\). See the verb in strkjv@2:47; strkjv@5:14|. This figure for death probably arose from the custom of burying families together (Genesis:15:15; strkjv@Judges:2:10|). {Saw corruption} (\eiden diaphthoran\). As Jesus did not (Acts:2:31|) as he shows in verse 37|.
rwp@Acts:13:48 @{As the Gentiles heard this they were glad} (\akouonta ta ethn echairon\). Present active participle of \akou\ and imperfect active of \chair\, linear action descriptive of the joy of the Gentiles. {Glorified the word of God} (\edoxazon ton logon tou theou\). Imperfect active again. The joy of the Gentiles increased the fury of the Jews. "The synagogue became a scene of excitement which must have been something like the original speaking with tongues" (Rackham). The joy of the Gentiles was to see how they could receive the higher blessing of Judaism without circumcision and other repellent features of Jewish ceremonialism. It was the gospel of grace and liberty from legalism that Paul had proclaimed. Whether strkjv@Galatians:4:13| describes this incident or not (the South Galatian theory), it illustrates it when Gentiles received Paul as if he were Christ Jesus himself. It was triumph with the Gentiles, but defeat with the Jews. {As many as were ordained to eternal life} (\hosoi san tetagmenoi eis zn ainion\). Periphrastic past perfect passive indicative of \tass\, a military term to place in orderly arrangement. The word "ordain" is not the best translation here. "Appointed," as Hackett shows, is better. The Jews here had voluntarily rejected the word of God. On the other side were those Gentiles who gladly accepted what the Jews had rejected, not all the Gentiles. Why these Gentiles here ranged themselves on God's side as opposed to the Jews Luke does not tell us. This verse does not solve the vexed problem of divine sovereignty and human free agency. There is no evidence that Luke had in mind an _absolutum decretum_ of personal salvation. Paul had shown that God's plan extended to and included Gentiles. Certainly the Spirit of God does move upon the human heart to which some respond, as here, while others push him away. {Believed} (\episteusan\). Summary or constative first aorist active indicative of \pisteu\. The subject of this verb is the relative clause. By no manner of legerdemain can it be made to mean "those who believe were appointed." It was saving faith that was exercised only by those who were appointed unto eternal life, who were ranged on the side of eternal life, who were thus revealed as the subjects of God's grace by the stand that they took on this day for the Lord. It was a great day for the kingdom of God.
rwp@Acts:14:5 @{An onset} (\horm\). A rush or impulse as in strkjv@James:3:4|. Old word, but only twice in the N.T. (here and James). It probably denotes not an actual attack so much as the open start, the co-operation of both Jews and Gentiles (the disaffected portion), "with their rulers" (\sun tois archousin autn\), that is the rulers of the Jewish synagogue (13:27|). The city officials would hardly join in a mob like this, though Hackett and Rackham think that the city magistrates were also involved as in Antioch in Pisidia (13:50|). {To entreat them shamefully} (\hubrisai\). First aorist active infinitive of \hubriz\, old verb to insult insolently. See on ¯Matthew:22:6; strkjv@Luke:18:32|. {To stone} (\lithobolsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \lithobole\, late verb from \lithobolos\ (\lithos\, stone, \ball\, to throw) to pelt with stones, the verb used of the stoning of Stephen (7:58|). See on ¯Matthew:21:35|. The plan to stone them shows that the Jews were in the lead and followed by the Gentile rabble. "Legal proceedings having failed the only resource left for the Jews was illegal violence" (Rackham).
rwp@Acts:14:8 @{At Lystra} (\en Lustrois\). Neuter plural as in strkjv@16:2; strkjv@2Timothy:3:11| while feminine singular in strkjv@14:6,21; strkjv@16:1|. There was apparently no synagogue in Lystra and so not many Jews. Paul and Barnabas had to do open-air preaching and probably had difficulty in being understood by the natives though both Greek and Latin inscriptions were discovered here by Professor Sterrett in 1885. The incident narrated here (verses 8-18|) shows how they got a real hearing among these rude heathen. {There sat} (\ekathto\). Imperfect middle of \kathmai\. Was sitting. This case is very much like that in strkjv@3:1-11|, healed by Peter. Possibly outside the gate (verse 13|) or some public place. {Impotent in his feet} (\adunatos tois posin\). Old verbal, but only here in the N.T. in this sense except figuratively in strkjv@Romans:15:1|. Elsewhere it means "impossible" (Matthew:19:26|). Locative case. Common in medical writers in the sense of "impotent." Songs:Tobit strkjv@2:10; strkjv@5:9. {Had walked} (\periepatsen\). Songs:best MSS., first aorist active indicative "walked," not \periepepatkei\, "had walked" (past perfect active).
rwp@Acts:14:21 @{When they had preached the gospel to that city} (\euaggelisamenoi tn polin ekeinn\). Having evangelized (first aorist middle participle) that city, a smaller city and apparently with no trouble from the Jews. {Had made many disciples} (\mathteusantes hikanous\). First aorist active participle of \mathteu\ from \mathts\, a learner or disciple. Late verb in Plutarch, to be a disciple (Matthew:27:57| like strkjv@John:19:38|) and then to disciple (old English, Spenser), to make a disciple as in strkjv@Matthew:28:19| and here. Paul and Barnabas were literally here obeying the command of Jesus in discipling people in this heathen city. {They returned to Lystra and to Iconium, and to Antioch} (\hupestrepsan eis tn Lustran kai eis Ikonion kai eis Antiocheian\). Derbe was the frontier city of the Roman empire. The quickest way to return to Antioch in Syria would have been by the Cilician Gates or by the pass over Mt. Taurus by which Paul and Silas will come to Derbe in the second tour (Acts:15:41-16:1|), but difficult to travel in winter. But it was necessary to revisit the churches in Lystra, Iconium, Antioch in Pisidia and to see that they were able to withstand persecution. Paul was a Roman citizen though he had not made use of this privilege as yet for his own protection. Against mob violence it would count for little, but he did not hesitate. Paul had been stoned in Lystra, threatened in Iconium, expelled in Antioch. He shows his wisdom in conserving his work.
rwp@Acts:15:1 @{And certain men came down from Judea} (\kai tines katelthontes apo ts Ioudaias\). Evidently the party of the circumcision in the church in Jerusalem (11:2|) had heard of the spread of the gospel among the Gentiles in Cyprus, Pamphylia, and South Galatia (Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia). Possibly John Mark after his desertion at Perga (13:13|) told of this as one of his reasons for coming home. At any rate echoes of the jubilation in Antioch in Syria would be certain to reach Jerusalem. The Judaizers in Jerusalem, who insisted that all the Gentile Christians must become Jews also, had acquiesced in the case of Cornelius and his group (11:1-18|) after plain proof by Peter that it was the Lord's doing. But they had not agreed to a formal campaign to turn the exception into the rule and to make Christianity mainly Gentile with a few Jews instead of mainly Jewish with a few Gentiles. Since Paul and Barnabas did not come up to Jerusalem, the leaders among the Judaizers decided to go down to Antioch and attack Paul and Barnabas there. They had volunteered to go without church action in Jerusalem for their activity is disclaimed by the conference (Acts:15:24|). In strkjv@Galatians:2:4| Paul with some heat describes these Judaizers as "false brethren, secretly introduced who sneaked in to spy out our liberty." It is reasonably certain that this visit to Jerusalem described in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| is the same one as the Jerusalem Conference in Acts strkjv@15:5-29| in spite of the effort of Ramsay to identify it with that in strkjv@11:29f|. Paul in Galatians is not giving a list of his visits to Jerusalem. He is showing his independence of the twelve apostles and his equality with them. He did not see them in strkjv@11:29f.|, but only "the elders." In strkjv@Acts:15| Luke gives the outward narrative of events, in strkjv@Galatians:2:1-10| Paul shows us the private interview with the apostles when they agreed on their line of conduct toward the Judaizers. In strkjv@Galatians:2:2| by the use of "them" (\autois\) Paul seems to refer to the first public meeting in Acts before the private interview that came in between verses strkjv@15:5-6|. If we recall the difficulty that Peter had on the subject of preaching the gospel to the heathen (10:1-11:18|), we can the better understand the attitude of the Judaizers. They were men of sincere convictions without a doubt, but they were obscurantists and unable and unwilling to receive new light from the Lord on a matter that involved their racial and social prejudices. They recalled that Jesus himself had been circumcised and that he had said to the Syro-Phoenician woman that he had come only save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew:15:24ff.|). They argued that Christ had not repealed circumcision. Songs:one of the great religious controversies of all time was begun, that between spiritual religion and ritualistic or ceremonial religion. It is with us yet with baptism taking the place of circumcision. These self-appointed champions of circumcision for Gentile Christians were deeply in earnest. {Taught the brethren} (\edidaskon tous adelphous\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to teach and kept it up. Their attitude was one of supercilious superiority. They probably resented the conduct of Barnabas, who, when sent by the Church in Jerusalem to investigate the conversion of the Greeks in Antioch (11:20-26|), did not return and report till a strong church had been established there with the help of Saul and only then with a big collection to confuse the issue. Paul and Barnabas were on hand, but the Judaizers persisted in their efforts to force their views on the church in Antioch. It was a crisis. {Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved} (\ean me peritmthte ti ethei Muses, ou dunasthe sthnai\). There was the dictum of the Judaizers to the Gentiles. Paul and Barnabas had been circumcised. This is probably the precise language employed, for they spoke in Greek to these Greeks. It is a condition of the third class (undetermined, but with prospect of being determined, \ean\ plus the first aorist passive subjunctive of \peritemn\). There was thus hope held out for them, but only on condition that they be circumcised. The issue was sharply drawn. The associative instrumental case (\ti ethei\) is customary. "Saved" (\sthnai\) here is the Messianic salvation. This doctrine denied the efficacy of the work of Christ.
rwp@Acts:15:11 @{That we shall be saved} (\sthnai\). First aorist passive infinitive in indirect discourse after \pisteuomen\. More exactly, "We believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus in like manner as they also." This thoroughly Pauline note shows that whatever hopes the Judaizers had about Peter were false. His doctrine of grace is as clear as a bell. He has lifted his voice against salvation by ceremony and ritualism. It was a great deliverance.
rwp@Acts:16:10 @{We sought} (\eztsamen\). This sudden use of the plural, dropped in strkjv@17:1| when Paul leaves Philippi, and resumed in strkjv@20:5| when Paul rejoins Luke in Philippi, argues conclusively that Luke, the author, is in the party ("we" portions of Acts) and shows in a writer of such literary skill as Luke that he is not copying a document in a blundering sort of way. Paul told his vision to the party and they were all ready to respond to the call. {Concluding} (\sunbibazontes\). A very striking word, present active participle of \sunbibaz\, old verb to make go together, to coalesce or knit together, to make this and that agree and so to conclude. Already in strkjv@9:22| of Paul's preaching. This word here gives a good illustration of the proper use of the reason in connection with revelation, to decide whether it is a revelation from God, to find out what it means for us, and to see that we obey the revelation when understood. God had called them to preach to the Macedonians. They had to go.
rwp@Acts:16:15 @{And when she was baptized} (\hs de ebaptisth\). First aorist passive indicative of \baptiz\. The river Gangites was handy for the ordinance and she had now been converted and was ready to make this public declaration of her faith in Jesus Christ. {And her household} (\kai ho oikos auts\). Who constituted her "household"? The term \oikos\, originally means the building as below, "into my house" and then it includes the inmates of a house. There is nothing here to show whether Lydia's "household" went beyond "the women" employed by her who like her had heard the preaching of Paul and had believed. "Possibly Euodia and Syntyche and the other women, strkjv@Phillipians:4:2,3|, may have been included in the family of Lydia, who may have employed many slaves and freed women in her trade" (Knowling). "This statement cannot be claimed as any argument for infant baptism, since the Greek word may mean her servants or her work-people" (Furneaux). In the household baptisms (Cornelius, Lydia, the jailor, Crispus) one sees "infants" or not according to his predilections or preferences. {If ye have judged me} (\ei kekrikate me\). Condition of the first class, assumed to be true (\ei\ and the indicative, here perfect active of \krin\). She had confessed her faith and submitted to baptism as proof that she was "faithful to the Lord" (\pistn ti kurii\), believing on the Lord. "If she was fit for that, surely she was fit to be their hostess" (Furneaux). And Paul and his party had clearly no comfortable place to stay while in Philippi. The ancient hotels or inns were abominable. Evidently Paul demurred for there were four of them and he did not wish to sacrifice his independence or be a burden even to a woman of wealth. {And she constrained us} (\kai parebiasato hmas\). Effective first aorist middle of \parabiazomai\, late word, in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:24:29|. Some moral force (\bia\) or hospitable persuasion was required (cf. strkjv@1Samuel:28:23|), but Lydia had her way as women usually do. Songs:he accepted Lydia's hospitality in Philippi, though he worked for his own living in Thessalonica (2Thessalonians:3:8|) and elsewhere (2Corinthians:11:9|). Songs:far only women have been won to Christ in Philippi. The use of "us" shows that Luke was not a householder in Philippi.
rwp@Acts:16:33 @{Washed their stripes} (\elousen apo tn plgn\). Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 227) cites an inscription of Pergamum with this very construction of \apo\ and the ablative, to wash off, though it is an old verb. This first aorist active indicative of \lou\, to bathe, succinctly shows what the jailor did to remove the stains left by the rods of the lictors (verse 22|). \Nipt\ was used for washing parts of the body. {And was baptized, he and all his, immediately} (\kai ebaptisth autos kai hoi autou hapantes parachrma\). The verb is in the singular agreeing with \autos\, but it is to be supplied with \hoi autou\, and it was done at once.
rwp@Acts:17:1 @{When they had passed through} (\diodeusantes\). First aorist active participle of \diodeu\, common verb in the _Koin_ (Polybius, Plutarch, LXX, etc.), but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:8:1|. It means literally to make one's way (\hodos\) through (\dia\). They took the Egnatian Way, one of the great Roman roads from Byzantium to Dyrrachium (over 500 miles long) on the Adriatic Sea, opposite Brundisium and so an extension of the Appian Way. {Amphipolis} (\tn Amphipolin\). Songs:called because the Strymon flowed almost around (\amphi\) it, the metropolis of Macedonia Prima, a free city, about 32 miles from Philippi, about three miles from the sea. Paul and Silas may have spent only a night here or longer. {Apollonia} (\tn Apollnian\). Not the famous Apollonia in Illyria, but 32 miles from Amphipolis on the Egnatian Way. Songs:here again a night was spent if no more. Why Paul hurried through these two large cities, if he did, we do not know. There are many gaps in Luke's narrative that we have no way of filling up. There may have been no synagogues for one thing. {To Thessalonica} (\eis Thessalonikn\). There was a synagogue here in this great commercial city, still an important city called Saloniki, of 70,000 population. It was originally called Therma, at the head of the Thermaic Gulf. Cassander renamed it Thessalonica after his wife, the sister of Alexander the Great. It was the capital of the second of the four divisions of Macedonia and finally the capital of the whole province. It shared with Corinth and Ephesus the commerce of the Aegean. One synagogue shows that even in this commercial city the Jews were not very numerous. As a political centre it ranked with Antioch in Syria and Caesarea in Palestine. It was a strategic centre for the spread of the gospel as Paul later said for it sounded (echoed) forth from Thessalonica throughout Macedonia and Achaia (1Thessalonians:1:8|).
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:21:4 @{Having found} (\aneurontes\). Second aorist active participle of \aneurisk\, to seek for, to find by searching (\ana\). There was a church here, but it was a large city and the number of members may not have been large. Probably some of those that fled from Jerusalem who came to Phoenicia (Acts:11:19|) started the work here. Paul went also through Phoenicia on the way to the Jerusalem Conference (15:3|). As at Troas and Miletus, so here Paul's indefatigible energy shows itself with characteristic zeal. {Through the Spirit} (\dia tou pneumatos\). The Holy Spirit undoubtedly who had already told Paul that bonds and afflictions awaited him in Jerusalem (20:23|). {That he should not set foot in Jerusalem} (\m epibainein eis Ierosoluma\). Indirect command with \m\ and the present active infinitive, not to keep on going to Jerusalem (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1046). In spite of this warning Paul felt it his duty as before (20:22|) to go on. Evidently Paul interpreted the action of the Holy Spirit as information and warning although the disciples at Tyre gave it the form of a prohibition. Duty called louder than warning to Paul even if both were the calls of God.
rwp@Acts:21:32 @{Forthwith} (\exauts\). Common in the _Koin_ (\ex auts\, supply \hras\, hour). {He took} (\paralabn\). See verses 24,26|. {Centurions} (\hekatontarchas\). See on ¯Luke:7:2| for discussion. Plural shows that Lysias the chiliarch took several hundred soldiers along (a centurion with each hundred). {Ran down} (\katedramen\). Effective second aorist active indicative of \katatrech\. From the tower of Antonia, vivid scene. {And they} (\hoi de\). Demonstrative use of \hoi\. The Jewish mob who had begun the work of killing Paul (verse 31|). {Left off beating Paul} (\epausanto tuptontes ton Paulon\). The participle with \pauomai\ describes what they were already doing, the supplementary participle (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1121). They stopped before the job was over because of the sudden onset of the Roman soldiers. Some ten years before in a riot at the passover the Roman guard marched down and in the panic several hundred were trampled to death.
rwp@Acts:22:1 @{Brethren and fathers} (\Andres adelphoi kai pateres\) Men, brethren, and fathers. The very language used by Stephen (7:2|) when arraigned before the Sanhedrin with Paul then present. Now Paul faces a Jewish mob on the same charges brought against Stephen. These words are those of courtesy and dignity (_amoris et honoris nomina_, Page). These men were Paul's brother Jews and were (many of them) official representatives of the people (Sanhedrists, priests, rabbis). Paul's purpose is conciliatory, he employs "his ready tact" (Rackham). {The defence which I now make unto you} (\mou ts pros humas nuni apologias\). Literally, My defence to you at this time. \Nuni\ is a sharpened form (by \-i\) of \nun\ (now), just now. The term \apologia\ (apology) is not our use of the word for apologizing for an offence, but the original sense of defence for his conduct, his life. It is an old word from \apologeomai\, to talk oneself off a charge, to make defence. It occurs also in strkjv@Acts:25:16| and then also in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11; strkjv@Phillipians:1:7,16; strkjv@2Timothy:4:16; strkjv@1Peter:3:15|. Paul uses it again in strkjv@Acts:25:16| as here about his defence against the charges made by the Jews from Asia. He is suspected of being a renegade from the Mosaic law and charged with specific acts connected with the alleged profanation of the temple. Songs:Paul speaks in Aramaic and recites the actual facts connected with his change from Judaism to Christianity. The facts make the strongest argument. He first recounts the well-known story of his zeal for Judaism in the persecution of the Christians and shows why the change came. Then he gives a summary of his work among the Gentiles and why he came to Jerusalem this time. He answers the charge of enmity to the people and the law and of desecration of the temple. It is a speech of great skill and force, delivered under remarkable conditions. The one in chapter strkjv@Acts:26| covers some of the same ground, but for a slightly different purpose as we shall see. For a discussion of the three reports in Acts of Paul's conversion see chapter strkjv@Acts:9|. Luke has not been careful to make every detail correspond, though there is essential agreement in all three.
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:23:5 @{I wist not} (\ouk idein\). Second past perfect of \oida\ used as an imperfect. The Greek naturally means that Paul did not know that it was the high priest who gave the order to smite his mouth. If this view is taken, several things may be said by way of explanation. The high priest may not have had on his official dress as the meeting was called hurriedly by Lysias. Paul had been away so long that he may not have known Ananias on sight. And then Paul may have had poor eyesight or the high priest may not have been sitting in the official seat. Another way of explaining it is to say that Paul was so indignant, even angry, at the command that he spoke without considering who it was that gave the order. The Greek allows this idea also. At any rate Paul at once recognizes the justice of the point made against him. He had been guilty of irreverence against the office of high priest as the passage from strkjv@Exodus:22:18| (LXX) shows and confesses his fault, but the rebuke was deserved. Jesus did not threaten (1Peter:2:23|) when smitten on the cheek (John:18:22|), but he did protest against the act and did not turn the other cheek.
rwp@Acts:23:6 @{But when Paul perceived} (\gnous de ho Paulos\). Perceiving (second aorist ingressive of \ginsk\). Paul quickly saw that his cause was ruined before the Sanhedrin by his unwitting attack on the high priest. It was impossible to get a fair hearing. Hence, Vincent says, "Paul, with great tact, seeks to bring the two parties of the council into collision with each other." Songs:Alford argues with the motto "divide and conquer." Farrar condemns Paul and takes strkjv@24:21| as a confession of error here, but that is reading into Paul's word about the resurrection more than he says. Page considers Luke's report meagre and unsatisfactory. Rackham thinks that the trial was already started and that Paul repeated part of his speech of the day before when "the Sadducees received his words with ostentatious scepticism and ridicule: this provoked counter-expressions of sympathy and credulity among the Pharisees." But all this is inference. We do not have to adopt the Jesuitical principle that the end justifies the means in order to see shrewdness and hard sense in what Paul said and did. Paul knew, of course, that the Sanhedrin was nearly evenly divided between Pharisees and Sadducees, for he himself had been a Pharisee. {I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees} (\Eg Pharisaios eimi huios Pharisain\). This was strictly true as we know from his Epistles (Phillipians:3:5|). {Touching the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question} (\peri elpidos kai anastases nekrn krinomai\). This was true also and this is the point that Paul mentions in strkjv@24:21|. His failure to mention again the fact that he was a Pharisee throws no discredit on Luke's report here. The chief point of difference between Pharisees and Sadducees was precisely this matter of the resurrection. And this was Paul's cardinal doctrine as a Christian minister. It was this fact that convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah and was "the very centre of his faith" (Page) and of his preaching. It was not a mere trick for Paul to proclaim this fact here and so divide the Sanhedrin. As a matter of fact, the Pharisees held aloof when the Sadducees persecuted Peter and the other apostles for preaching resurrection in the case of Jesus and even Gamaliel threw cold water on the effort to punish them for it (Acts:5:34-39|). Songs:then Paul was really recurring to the original cleavage on this point and was able to score a point against the Sadducees as Gamaliel, his great teacher, had done before him. Besides, "Paul and Pharisaism seem to us such opposite ideas that we often forget that to Paul Christianity was the natural development of Judaism" (Page). Paul shows this in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11|.
rwp@Acts:23:12 @{Banded together} (\poisantes sustrophn\). See on strkjv@19:40| (riot), but here conspiracy, secret combination, binding together like twisted cords. {Bound themselves under a curse} (\anethematisan heautous\). First aorist active indicative of \anathematiz\, a late word, said by Cremer and Thayer to be wholly Biblical or ecclesiastical. But Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 95) quotes several examples of the verb in an Attic cursing tablet from Megara of the first or second century A.D. This proof shows that the word, as well as \anathema\ (substantive) from which the verb is derived, was employed by pagans as well as by Jews. Deissmann suggests that Greek Jews like the seven sons of Sceva may have been the first to coin it. It occurs in the LXX as well as strkjv@Mark:14:71| (which see and Luke strkjv@21:5|); strkjv@Acts:23:12,14,21|. They placed themselves under an anathema or curse, devoted themselves to God (cf. strkjv@Leviticus:27:28f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:16:22|). {Drink} (\pein=piein\). Second aorist active infinitive of \pin\. For this shortened form see Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 343. {Till they had killed} (\hes hou apokteinsin\). First aorist active subjunctive of \apoktein\, common verb. No reason to translate "had killed," simply "till they should kill," the aorist merely punctiliar action, the subjunctive retained instead of the optative for vividness as usual in the _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 974-6). Same construction in verse 14|. King Saul took an "anathema" that imperilled Jonathan (1Samuel:14:24|). Perhaps the forty felt that the rabbis could find some way to absolve the curse if they failed. See this verse repeated in verse 21|.
rwp@Acts:25:26 @{No certain thing} (\asphales ti--ou\). Nothing definite or reliable (\a\ privative, \sphall\, to trip). All the charges of the Sanhedrin slipped away or were tripped up by Paul. Festus confesses that he had nothing left and thereby convicts himself of gross insincerity in his proposal to Paul in verse 9| about going up to Jerusalem. By his own statement he should have set Paul free. The various details here bear the marks of the eyewitness. Luke was surely present and witnessed this grand spectacle with Paul as chief performer. {Unto my lord} (\ti kurii\). Augustus (Octavius) and Tiberius refused the title of \kurios\ (lord) as too much like _rex_ (king) and like master and slave, but the servility of the subjects gave it to the other emperors who accepted it (Nero among them). Antoninus Pius put it on his coins. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, p. 105) gives an ostracon dated Aug. 4, A.D. 63 with the words "in the year nine of Nero the lord" (\enatou Nernos tou kuriou\). Deissmann (_op. cit._, pp. 349ff.) runs a most interesting parallel "between the cult of Christ and the cult of Caesar in the application of the term \kurios\, lord" in ostraca, papyri, inscriptions. Beyond a doubt Paul has all this fully in mind when he says in strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| that "no one is able to say \Kurios Isous\ except in the Holy Spirit" (cf. also strkjv@Phillipians:2:11|). The Christians claimed this word for Christ and it became the test in the Roman persecutions as when Polycarp steadily refused to say " Lord Caesar" and insisted on saying "Lord Jesus" when it meant his certain death. {Before you} (\eph' humn\). The whole company. In no sense a new trial, but an examination in the presence of these prominent men to secure data and to furnish entertainment and pleasure to Agrippa (verse 22|). {Especially before thee} (\malista epi sou\). Out of courtesy. It was the main reason as verse 22| shows. Agrippa was a Jew and Festus was glad of the chance to see what he thought of Paul's case. {After examination had} (\ts anakrises genomens\). Genitive absolute, "the examination having taken place." \Anakrisis\ from \anakrin\ (cf. strkjv@12:19; strkjv@24:8; strkjv@28:18|) is a legal term for preliminary examination. Only here in the N.T. Inscriptions and papyri give it as examination of slaves or other property. {That I may have somewhat to write} (\hops sch ti graps\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive \sch\ (may get) with \hops\ (final particle like \hina\). \Ti graps\ in indirect question after \sch\ is either future indicative or aorist subjunctive (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1045). Festus makes it plain that this is not a "trial," but an examination for his convenience to help him out of a predicament.
rwp@Acts:26:6 @{And now} (\kai nun\). Sharp comparison between his youth and the present. {To be judged for the hope} (\ep' elpidi--krinomenos\). The hope of the resurrection and of the promised Messiah (13:32|). Page calls verses 6-8| a parenthesis in the course of Paul's argument by which he shows that his life in Christ is a real development of the best in Pharisaism. He does resume his narrative in verse 9|, but verses 6-8| are the core of his defence already presented in strkjv@Galatians:3; strkjv@Romans:9-11| where he proves that the children of faith are the real seed of Abraham.
rwp@Acts:26:7 @{Our twelve tribes} (\to ddekaphulon hmn\). A word found only here in N.T. and in Christian and Jewish writings, though \ddekamnon\ (twelve month) is common in the papyri and \dekaphulos\ (ten tribes) in Herodotus. Paul's use of this word for the Jewish people, like strkjv@James:1:1| (\tais ddeka phulais\, the twelve tribes), shows that Paul had no knowledge of any "lost ten tribes." There is a certain national pride and sense of unity in spite of the dispersion (Page). {Earnestly} (\en ekteneii\). A late word from \ektein\, to stretch out, only here in N.T., but in papyri and inscriptions. Page refers to Simeon and Anna (Luke:2:25-28|) as instances of Jews looking for the coming of the Messiah. Note the accusative of \nukta kai hmeran\ as in strkjv@20:31|. {Hope to attain} (\elpizei katantsai\). This Messianic hope had been the red thread running through Jewish history. Today, alas, it is a sadly worn thread for Jews who refuse to see the Messiah in Jesus. {I am accused by Jews} (\egkaloumai hupo Ioudain\). The very word used in strkjv@23:28| (\enekaloun\) which see, and by Jews of all people in the world whose mainspring was this very "hope." It is a tremendously effective turn.
rwp@Acts:27:1 @{That we should sail} (\tou apoplein hmas\). This genitive articular infinitive with \ekrith\ like the LXX construction translating the Hebrew infinitive construct is awkward in Greek. Several similar examples in strkjv@Luke:17:1; strkjv@Acts:10:25; strkjv@20:3| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1068). Luke alone uses this old verb in N.T. He uses nine compounds of \ple\, to sail. Note the reappearance of "we" in the narrative. It is possible, of course, that Luke was not with Paul during the series of trials at Caesarea, or at least, not all the time. But it is natural for Luke to use "we" again because he and Aristarchus are travelling with Paul. In Caesarea Paul was the centre of the action all the time whether Luke was present or not. The great detail and minute accuracy of Luke's account of this voyage and shipwreck throw more light upon ancient seafaring than everything else put together. Smith's _Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul_ is still a classic on the subject. Though so accurate in his use of sea terms, yet Luke writes like a landsman, not like a sailor. Besides, the character of Paul is here revealed in a remarkable fashion. {They delivered} (\paredidoun\). Imperfect active \mega\ form rather than the old \-mi\ form \paredidosan\ as in strkjv@4:33|, from \paradidmi\. Perhaps the imperfect notes the continuance of the handing over. {Certain other prisoners} (\tinas heterous desmtas\). Bound (\desmtas\) like Paul, but not necessarily appellants to Caesar, perhaps some of them condemned criminals to amuse the Roman populace in the gladiatorial shows, most likely pagans though \heterous\ does not have to mean different kind of prisoners from Paul. {Of the Augustan band} (\speirs Sebasts\). Note Ionic genitive \speirs\, not \speiras\. See on ¯Matthew:27:1; strkjv@Acts:10:1|. \Cohortis Augustae\. We do not really know why this cohort is called "Augustan." It may be that it is part of the imperial commissariat (_frumentarii_) since Julius assumes chief authority in the grain ship (verse 11|). These legionary centurions when in Rome were called _peregrini_ (foreigners) because their work was chiefly in the provinces. This man Julius may have been one of them.
rwp@Acts:27:22 @{And now} (\kai ta nun\). Accusative plural neuter article of general reference in contrast with \men\ in verse 21|. Paul shows modesty (Bengel) in the mild contrast. {No loss of life} (\apobol psuchs oudemia\). Old word from \apoball\, to throw away, only twice in N.T. strkjv@Romans:11:15| (rejection) and here. He had foretold such loss of life as likely (verse 10|), but he now gives his reason for his changed view.
rwp@Acts:27:44 @{Some on planks} (\hous men epi sanisin\). Common Greek idiom (\hous men--hous de\) for "some--some." The only N.T. instance of the old Greek word \sanis\ for board or plank. The breaking of the ship gave scraps of timber which some used. {They all escaped safe} (\pantas diasthnai\). First aorist passive infinitive of \diasz\ (the very word used for the desire of the centurion about Paul) with accusative of general reference, the clause being subject of \egeneto\. Songs:Luke in this marvellous narrative, worthy of any historian in any age, shows how Paul's promise was fulfilled (verse 24|). Paul the prisoner is the hero of the voyage and shipwreck, a wonderful example of God's providential care.
rwp@Acts:28:25 @{When they agreed not} (\asumphnoi ontes\). Old adjective, only here in N.T., double compound (\a\ privative, \sum, phn\), without symphony, out of harmony, dissonant, discordant. It was a triumph to gain adherents at all in such an audience. {They departed} (\apeluonto\). Imperfect middle (direct) indicative, "They loosed themselves from Paul." Graphic close. {After that Paul had spoken one word} (\eipontos tou Paulou rhma hen\). Genitive absolute. One last word (like a preacher) after the all day exposition. {Well} (\kals\). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:14:7; strkjv@Mark:7:6,9| (irony). Here strong indignation in the very position of the word (Page). {To your fathers} (\pros tous pateras humn\). Songs:Aleph A B instead of \hmn\ (our) like Stephen in strkjv@7:52| whose words Paul had heard. By mentioning the Holy Spirit Paul shows (Knowling) that they are resisting God (7:52|).
rwp@Info_Colossians @ SOME BOOKS ABOUT COLOSSIANS One may note commentaries by T. K. Abbott (_Int. Crit_. 1897), Gross Alexander (1910), Dargan (1887), Dibelius (1912), Ellicott (1890), Ewald (1905), Griffith-Thomas (1923), Findlay (1895), Haupt (1903), M. Jones (1923), Lightfoot (1904), Maclaren (1888), Meinertz (1917), Moule (1900), Mullins (1913), Oltramare (1891), Peake (1903), Radford (1931), A. T. Robertson (1926), Rutherford (1908), E. F. Scott (1930), Von Soden (1893), F. B. Westcott (1914), Williams (1907). strkjv@Colossians:1:1 @{Of Christ Jesus} (\Christou Isou\). This order in the later epistles shows that \Christos\ is now regarded as a proper name and not just a verbal adjective (Anointed One, Messiah). Paul describes himself because he is unknown to the Colossians, not because of attack as in strkjv@Galatians:1:1|. {Timothy} (\Timotheos\). Mentioned as in I and II Thess. when in Corinth, II Cor. when in Macedonia, Phil. and Philemon when in Rome as here.
rwp@Colossians:2:12 @{Having been buried with him in baptism} (\suntaphentes auti en ti baptismati\). Second aorist passive participle of \sunthapt\, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:6:4|, followed by associative instrumental case (\auti\). Thayer's Lexicon says: "For all who in the rite of baptism are plunged under the water, thereby declare that they put faith in the expiatory death of Christ for the pardon of their past sins." Yes, and for all future sins also. This word gives Paul's vivid picture of baptism as a symbolic burial with Christ and resurrection also to newness of life in him as Paul shows by the addition "wherein ye were also raised with him" (\en hi kai sungerthte\). "In which baptism" (\baptismati\, he means). First aorist passive indicative of \sunegeir\, late and rare verb (Plutarch for waking up together), in LXX, in N.T. only in strkjv@Colossians:2:12; strkjv@3:1; strkjv@Ephesians:2:6|. In the symbol of baptism the resurrection to new life in Christ is pictured with an allusion to Christ's own resurrection and to our final resurrection. Paul does not mean to say that the new life in Christ is caused or created by the act of baptism. That is grossly to misunderstand him. The Gnostics and the Judaizers were sacramentalists, but not so Paul the champion of spiritual Christianity. He has just given the spiritual interpretation to circumcision which itself followed Abraham's faith (Romans:4:10-12|). Cf. strkjv@Galatians:3:27|. Baptism gives a picture of the change already wrought in the heart "through faith" (\dia ts pistes\). {In the working of God} (\ts energeias tou theou\). Objective genitive after \pistes\. See strkjv@1:29| for \energeia\. God had power to raise Christ from the dead (\tou egeirantos\, first aorist active participle of \egeir\, the fact here stated) and he has power (energy) to give us new life in Christ by faith.
rwp@Colossians:2:18 @{Rob you of your prize} (\katabrabeuet\). Late and rare compound (\kata, brabeu\, strkjv@Colossians:3:15|) to act as umpire against one, perhaps because of bribery in Demosthenes and Eustathius (two other examples in Preisigke's _Worterbuch_), here only in the N.T. Songs:here it means to decide or give judgment against. The judge at the games is called \brabeus\ and the prize \brabeion\ (1Corinthians:9:24; strkjv@Phillipians:3:14|). It is thus parallel to, but stronger than, \krinet\ in verse 16|. {By a voluntary humility} (\theln en tapeinophrosuni\). Present active participle of \thel\, to wish, to will, but a difficult idiom. Some take it as like an adverb for "wilfully" somewhat like \thelontas\ in strkjv@2Peter:3:5|. Others make it a Hebraism from the LXX usage, "finding pleasure in humility." The Revised Version margin has "of his own mere will, by humility." Hort suggested \en ethelotapeinophrosuni\ (in gratuitous humility), a word that occurs in Basil and made like \ethelothrskia\ in verse 23|. {And worshipping of the angels} (\kai thrskeii tn aggeln\). In strkjv@3:12| humility (\tapeinophrosunn\) is a virtue, but it is linked with worship of the angels which is idolatry and so is probably false humility as in verse 23|. They may have argued for angel worship on the plea that God is high and far removed and so took angels as mediators as some men do today with angels and saints in place of Christ. {Dwelling in the things which he hath seen} (\ha heoraken embateun\). Some MSS. have "not," but not genuine. This verb \embateu\ (from \embats\, stepping in, going in) has given much trouble. Lightfoot has actually proposed \kenembateun\ (a verb that does not exist, though \kenembate\ does occur) with \aira\, to tread on empty air, an ingenious suggestion, but now unnecessary. It is an old word for going in to take possession (papyri examples also). W. M. Ramsay (_Teaching of Paul_, pp. 287ff.) shows from inscriptions in Klaros that the word is used of an initiate in the mysteries who "set foot in" (\enebateusen\) and performed the rest of the rites. Paul is here quoting the very work used of these initiates who "take their stand on" these imagined revelations in the mysteries. {Vainly puffed up} (\eiki phusioumenos\). Present passive participle of \phusio\, late and vivid verb from \phusa\, pair of bellows, in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:4:6,18f.; strkjv@8:1|. Powerful picture of the self-conceit of these bombastic Gnostics.
rwp@Colossians:3:14 @{And above all these things} (\epi psin de toutois\). "And upon all these things." {Put on love} (\tn agapn\). See strkjv@Luke:3:20|. The verb has to be supplied (\endusasthe\) from verse 12| as the accusative case \agapn\ shows. {Which is} (\ho estin\). Neuter singular of the relative and not feminine like \agap\ (the antecedent) nor masculine like \sundesmos\ in the predicate. However, there are similar examples of \ho estin\ in the sense of _quod est_ (_id est_), "that is," in strkjv@Mark:14:42; strkjv@15:42|, without agreement in gender and number. Songs:also strkjv@Ephesians:5:5| where \ho estin\ = "which thing." {The bond of perfectness} (\sundesmos ts teleiottos\). See strkjv@2:19| for \sundesmos\. Here it is apparently the girdle that holds the various garments together. The genitive (\teleiottos\) is probably that of apposition with the girdle of love. In a succinct way Paul has here put the idea about love set forth so wonderfully in strkjv@1Corinthians:13|.
rwp@Colossians:3:18 @{Wives} (\kai gunaikes\). The article here distinguishes class from class and with the vocative case can be best rendered "Ye wives." Songs:with each group. {Be in subjection to your husbands} (\hupotassesthe tois andrasin\). "Own" (\idiois\) is genuine in strkjv@Ephesians:5:22|, but not here. The verb \hupotassomai\ has a military air, common in the _Koin_ for such obedience. Obedience in government is essential as the same word shows in strkjv@Romans:13:1,5|. {As is fitting in the Lord} (\hs anken en Kurii\). This is an idiomatic use of the imperfect indicative with verbs of propriety in present time (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 919). Wives have rights and privileges, but recognition of the husband's leadership is essential to a well-ordered home, only the assumption is that the husband has a head and a wise one.
rwp@stops at verse 14, and what Robertson shows as 15 is part of 14.
rwp@Ephesians:2:8 @{For by grace} (\ti gar chariti\). Explanatory reason. "By the grace" already mentioned in verse 5| and so with the article. {Through faith} (\dia pistes\). This phrase he adds in repeating what he said in verse 5| to make it plainer. "Grace" is God's part, "faith" ours. {And that} (\kai touto\). Neuter, not feminine \taut\, and so refers not to \pistis\ (feminine) or to \charis\ (feminine also), but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part. Paul shows that salvation does not have its source (\ex humn\, out of you) in men, but from God. Besides, it is God's gift (\dron\) and not the result of our work.
rwp@Ephesians:5:22 @{Be in subjection}. Not in the Greek text of B and Jerome knew of no MS. with it. K L and most MSS. have \hupotassesthe\ like strkjv@Colossians:3:18|, while Aleph A P have \hupotassesthsan\ (let them be subject to). But the case of \andrasin\ (dative) shows that the verb is understood from verse 21| if not written originally. \Idiois\ (own) is genuine here, though not in strkjv@Colossians:3:18|. {As unto the Lord} (\hs ti Kurii\). Songs:here instead of \hs anken en Kurii\ of strkjv@Colossians:3:18|.
rwp@Galatians:2:14 @{But when I saw} (\All' hote eidon\). Paul did see and saw it in time to speak. {That they walked not uprightly} (\hoti orthopodousin\). Present active indicative retained in indirect discourse, "they are not walking straight." \Orthopode\ (\orthos\, straight, \pous\, foot). Found only here and in later ecclesiastical writers, though \orthopodes bainontes\ does occur. {According to the truth of the gospel} (\pros tn altheian tou euaggeliou\). Just as in strkjv@2:5|. Paul brought them to face (\pros\) that. {I said unto Cephas before them all} (\eipon ti Kphi emprosthen pantn\). {Being a Jew} (\Ioudaios huparchn\, though being a Jew). Condition of first class, assumed as true. It was not a private quarrel, but a matter of public policy. One is a bit curious to know what those who consider Peter the first pope will do with this open rebuke by Paul, who was in no sense afraid of Peter or of all the rest. {As do the Gentiles} (\ethniks\). Late adverb, here only in N.T. Like Gentiles. {As do the Jews} (\Ioudaiks\). Only here in N.T., but in Josephus. {To live as do the Jews} (\Ioudazein\). Late verb, only here in the N.T. From \Ioudaios\, Jew. Really Paul charges Peter with trying to compel (conative present, \anagkazeis\) the Gentiles to live all like Jews, to Judaize the Gentile Christians, the very point at issue in the Jerusalem Conference when Peter so loyally supported Paul. It was a bold thrust that allowed no reply. But Paul won Peter back and Barnabas also. If II Peter is genuine, as is still possible, he shows it in strkjv@2Peter:3:15|. Paul and Barnabas remained friends (Acts:15:39f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:9:6|), though they soon separated over John Mark.
rwp@Galatians:2:18 @{A transgressor} (\parabatn\). Peter, by his shifts had contradicted himself helplessly as Paul shows by this condition. When he lived like a Gentile, he tore down the ceremonial law. When he lived like a Jew, he tore down salvation by grace.
rwp@Galatians:3:17 @{Now this I say} (\touto de leg\). Now I mean this. He comes back to his main point and is not carried afield by the special application of \sperma\ to Christ. {Confirmed beforehand by God} (\prokekurmenn hupo tou theou\). Perfect passive participle of \prokuro\, in Byzantine writers and earliest use here. Nowhere else in N.T. The point is in \pro\ and \hupo tou theou\ (by God) and in \meta\ (after) as Burton shows. {Four hundred and thirty years after} (\meta tetrakosia kai triakonta et\). Literally, "after four hundred and thirty years." This is the date in strkjv@Exodus:12:40| for the sojourn in Egypt (cf. strkjv@Genesis:15:13|). But the LXX adds words to include the time of the patriarchs in Canaan in this number of years which would cut the time in Egypt in two. Cf. strkjv@Acts:7:6|. It is immaterial to Paul's argument which chronology is adopted except that "the longer the covenant had been in force the more impressive is his statement" (Burton). {Doth not disannul} (\ouk akuroi\). Late verb \akuro\, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:15:6; strkjv@Mark:7:13| (from \a\ privative and \kuros\, authority). On \katargsai\ see strkjv@1Corinthians:1:28; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@15:24,26|.
rwp@Galatians:3:28 @{There can be neither} (\ouk eni\). Not a shortened form of \enesti\, but the old lengthened form of \en\ with recessive accent. Songs:\ouk eni\ means "there is not" rather than "there cannot be," a statement of a fact rather than a possibility, as Burton rightly shows against Lightfoot. {One man} (\heis\). No word for "man" in the Greek, and yet \heis\ is masculine, not neuter \hen\. "One moral personality" (Vincent). The point is that "in Christ Jesus" race or national distinctions ("neither Jew nor Greek") do not exist, class differences ("neither bond nor free," no proletarianism and no capitalism) vanish, sex rivalry ("no male and female") disappears. This radical statement marks out the path along which Christianity was to come in the sphere (\en\) and spirit and power of Christ. Candour compels one to confess that this goal has not yet been fully attained. But we are on the road and there is no hope on any way than on "the Jesus Road."
rwp@Galatians:5:17 @{Lusteth against} (\epithumei kata\). Like a tug of war. This use of \sarx\ as opposed to the Spirit (Holy Spirit) personifies \sarx\. Lightfoot argues that \epithumei\ cannot be used with the Spirit and so some other verb must be supplied for it. But that is wholly needless, for the verb, like \epithumia\, does not mean evil desire, but simply to long for. Christ and Satan long for the possession of the city of Man Soul as Bunyan shows. {Are contrary the one to the other} (\alllois antikeitai\). Are lined up in conflict, face to face (\anti-\), a spiritual duel (cf. Christ's temptations), with dative case of personal interest (\alllois\). {That ye may not do} (\hina m poite\). "That ye may not keep on doing" (present active subjunctive of \poie\). {That ye would} (\ha ean thelte\). "Whatever ye wish" (indefinite relative with \ean\ and present subjunctive).
rwp@Galatians:6:12 @{To make a fair show} (\euprospsai\). First aorist active infinitive of \euprospe\, late verb from \euprospos\, fair of face (\eu, prospon\). Here only in N.T., but one example in papyri (Tebt. I. 19 12 B.C. 114) which shows what may happen to any of our N.T. words not yet found elsewhere. It is in Chrysostom and later writers. {They compel} (\anagkazousin\). Conative present active indicative, "they try to compel." {For the cross of Christ} (\ti stauri tou Christou\). Instrumental case (causal use, Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 532). Cf. strkjv@2Corinthians:2:13|. "For professing the cross of Christ" (Lightfoot).
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 STYLE It is called an epistle and so it is, but of a peculiar kind. In fact, as has been said, it begins like a treatise, proceeds like a sermon, and concludes like a letter. It is, in fact, more like a literary composition than any other New Testament book as Deissmann shows: "It points to the fact that the Epistle to the Hebrews, with its more definitely artistic, more literary language (corresponding to its more theological subject matter), constituted an epoch in the history of the new religion. Christianity is beginning to lay hands on the instruments of culture; the literary and theological period has begun" (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 70f.). But Blass (_Die Rhythmen der asianischen und romischen Kunstprosa_, 1905) argues that the author of Hebrews certainly and Paul probably were students of Greek oratory and rhetoric. He is clearly wrong about Paul and probably so about the author of Hebrews. There is in Hebrews more of "a studied rhetorical periodicity" (Thayer), but with many "parenthetical involutions" (Westcott) and with less of "the impetuous eloquence of Paul." The eleventh chapter reveals a studied style and as a whole the Epistle belongs to the literary _Koin_ rather than to the vernacular. Moulton (_Cambridge Biblical Essays_, p. 483) thinks that the author did not know Hebrew but follows the Septuagint throughout in his abundant use of the Old Testament.
rwp@Hebrews:1:3 @{Being} (\n\). Absolute and timeless existence (present active participle of \eimi\) in contrast with \genomenos\ in verse 4| like \n\ in strkjv@John:1:1| (in contrast with \egeneto\ in strkjv@1:14|) and like \huparchn\ and \genomenos\ in strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {The effulgence of his glory} (\apaugasma ts doxs\). The word \apaugasma\, late substantive from \apaugaz\, to emit brightness (\aug, augaz\ in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:4|), here only in the N.T., but in Wisdom strkjv@7:26 and in Philo. It can mean either reflected brightness, refulgence (Calvin, Thayer) or effulgence (ray from an original light body) as the Greek fathers hold. Both senses are true of Christ in his relation to God as Jesus shows in plain language in strkjv@John:12:45; strkjv@14:9|. "The writer is using metaphors which had already been applied to Wisdom and the Logos" (Moffatt). The meaning "effulgence" suits the context better, though it gives the idea of eternal generation of the Son (John:1:1|), the term Father applied to God necessarily involving Son. See this same metaphor in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:6|. {The very image of his substance} (\charaktr ts hupostases\). \Charaktr\ is an old word from \charass\, to cut, to scratch, to mark. It first was the agent (note ending \=tr\) or tool that did the marking, then the mark or impress made, the exact reproduction, a meaning clearly expressed by \charagma\ (Acts:17:29; strkjv@Revelation:13:16f.|). Menander had already used (Moffatt) \charaktr\ in the sense of our "character." The word occurs in the inscriptions for "person" as well as for "exact reproduction" of a person. The word \hupostasis\ for the being or essence of God "is a philosophical rather than a religious term" (Moffatt). Etymologically it is the sediment or foundation under a building (for instance). In strkjv@11:1| \hypostasis\ is like the "title-deed" idea found in the papyri. Athanasius rightly used strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4| in his controversy with Arius. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11| pictures the real and eternal deity of Christ free from the philosophical language here employed. But even Paul's simpler phrase \morph theou\ (the form of God) has difficulties of its own. The use of \Logos\ in strkjv@John:1:1-18| is parallel to strkjv@Hebrews:1:1-4|. {And upholding} (\phern te\). Present active participle of \pher\ closely connected with \n\ (being) by \te\ and like strkjv@Colossians:1:17| in idea. The newer science as expounded by Eddington and Jeans is in harmony with the spiritual and personal conception of creation here presented. {By the word of his power} (\ti rmati ts dunames autou\). Instrumental case of \rma\ (word). See strkjv@11:3| for \rmati theou\ (by the word of God) as the explanation of creation like Genesis, but here \autou\ refers to God's Son as in strkjv@1:2|. {Purification of sins} (\katharismon tn hamartin\). \Katharismos\ is from \kathariz\, to cleanse (Matthew:8:3; strkjv@Hebrews:9:14|), here only in Hebrews, but in same sense of cleansing from sins, strkjv@2Peter:1:9; strkjv@Job:7:21|. Note middle participle \poisamenos\ like \heuramenos\ in strkjv@9:12|. This is the first mention of the priestly work of Christ, the keynote of this Epistle. {Sat down} (\ekathisen\). First aorist active of \kathiz\, "took his seat," a formal and dignified act. {Of the Majesty on high} (\ts megalosuns en hupslois\). Late word from \megas\, only in LXX (Deuteronomy:32:3; strkjv@2Samuel:7:23|, etc.), Aristeas, strkjv@Hebrews:1:3; strkjv@8:1; strkjv@Jude:1:25|. Christ resumed his original dignity and glory (John:17:5|). The phrase \en hupslois\ occurs in the Psalms (Psalms:93:4|), here only in N.T., elsewhere \en hupsistois\ in the highest (Matthew:21:9; strkjv@Luke:2:14|) or \en tois epouraniois\ in the heavenlies (Ephesians:1:3,20|). Jesus is here pictured as King (Prophet and Priest also) Messiah seated at the right hand of God.
rwp@Hebrews:2:4 @{God also bearing witness with them} (\sunepimarturountos tou theou\). Genitive absolute with the present active participle of the late double compound verb \sunepimarture\, to join (\sun\) in giving additional (\epi\) testimony (\marture\). Here only in N.T., but in Aristotle, Polybius, Plutarch. {Both by signs} (\smeiois te kai\) {and wonders} (\kai terasin\) {and by manifold powers} (\kai poikilais dunamesin\) {and by gifts of the Holy Ghost} (\kai pneumatos hagiou merismois\). Instrumental case used with all four items. See strkjv@Acts:2:22| for the three words for miracles in inverse order (powers, wonders, signs). Each word adds an idea about the \erga\ (works) of Christ. \Teras\ (wonder) attracts attention, \dunamis\ (power) shows God's power, \smeion\ reveals the purpose of God in the miracles. For \poikilais\ (manifold, many-coloured) see strkjv@Matthew:4:24; strkjv@James:1:2|. For \merismos\ for distribution (old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:4:12|) see strkjv@1Corinthians:12:4-30|. {According to his own will} (\kata tn autou thelsin\). The word \thelsis\ is called a vulgarism by Pollux. The writer is fond of words in \-is\.
rwp@Hebrews:2:9 @{Even Jesus} (\Isoun\). We do not see man triumphant, but we do see Jesus, for the author is not ashamed of his human name, realizing man's destiny, "the very one who has been made a little lower than the angels" (\ton brachu ti par' aggelous lattmenon\), quoting and applying the language of the Psalm in verse 7| to Jesus (with article \ton\ and the perfect passive participle of \elatta\). But this is not all. Death has defeated man, but Jesus has conquered death. {Because of the suffering of death} (\dia to pathma tou thanatou\). The causal sense of \dia\ with the accusative as in strkjv@1:14|. Jesus in his humanity was put lower than the angels "for a little while" (\brachu ti\). Because of the suffering of death we see (\blepomen\) Jesus crowned (\estephanmenon\, perfect passive participle of \stephano\ from verse 7|), crowned already "with glory and honour" as Paul shows in strkjv@Phillipians:2:9-11| (more highly exalted, \huperupssen\) "that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow." There is more glory to come to Jesus surely, but he is already at God's right hand (1:3|). {That by the grace of God he should taste death for every man} (\hops chariti theou huper pantos geustai thanatou\). This purpose clause (\hops\ instead of the more usual \hina\) is pregnant with meaning. The author interprets and applies the language of the Psalm to Jesus and here puts Christ's death in behalf of (\huper\), and so instead of, every man as the motive for his incarnation and death on the Cross. The phrase to taste death (\geuomai thanatou\) occurs in the Gospels (Matthew:16:28; strkjv@Mark:9:1; strkjv@Luke:9:27; strkjv@John:8:52|), though not in the ancient Greek. It means to see death (Hebrews:11:5|), "a bitter experience, not a rapid sip" (Moffatt). His death was in behalf of every one (not everything as the early Greek theologians took it). The death of Christ (Andrew Fuller) was sufficient for all, efficient for some. It is all "by the grace (\chariti\, instrumental case) of God," a thoroughly Pauline idea. Curiously enough some MSS. read \chris theou\ (apart from God) in place of \chariti theou\, Nestorian doctrine whatever the origin.
rwp@Hebrews:2:10 @{It became him} (\eprepen auti\). Imperfect active of \prep\, old verb to stand out, to be becoming or seemly. Here it is impersonal with \teleisai\ as subject, though personal in strkjv@Hebrews:7:26|. \Auti\ (him) is in the dative case and refers to God, not to Christ as is made plain by \ton archgon\ (author). One has only to recall strkjv@John:3:16| to get the idea here. The voluntary humiliation or incarnation of Christ the Son a little lower than the angels was a seemly thing to God the Father as the writer now shows in a great passage (2:10-18|) worthy to go beside strkjv@Phillipians:2:5-11|. {For whom} (\di' hon\). Referring to \auti\ (God) as the reason (cause) for the universe (\ta panta\). {Through whom} (\di' hou\). With the genitive \dia\ expresses the agent by whom the universe came into existence, a direct repudiation of the Gnostic view of intermediate agencies (aeons) between God and the creation of the universe. Paul puts it succinctly in strkjv@Romans:11:36| by his \ex autou kai di' autou kai eis auton ta panta\. The universe comes out of God, by means of God, for God. This writer has already said that God used his Son as the Agent (\di' hou\) in creation (1:2|), a doctrine in harmony with strkjv@Colossians:1:15f.| (\en auti, di' autou eis auton\) and strkjv@John:1:3|. {In bringing} (\agagonta\). Second aorist active participle of \ag\ in the accusative case in spite of the dative \auti\ just before to which it refers. {The author} (\ton archgon\). Old compound word (\arch\ and \ag\) one leading off, leader or prince as in strkjv@Acts:5:31|, one blazing the way, a pioneer (Dods) in faith (Hebrews:12:2|), author (Acts:3:15|). Either sense suits here, though author best (verse 9|). Jesus is the author of salvation, the leader of the sons of God, the Elder Brother of us all (Romans:8:29|). {To make perfect} (\teleisai\). First aorist active infinitive of \teleio\ (from \teleios\). If one recoils at the idea of God making Christ perfect, he should bear in mind that it is the humanity of Jesus that is under discussion. The writer does not say that Jesus was sinful (see the opposite in strkjv@4:15|), but simply that "by means of sufferings" God perfected his Son in his human life and death for his task as Redeemer and Saviour. One cannot know human life without living it. There was no moral imperfection in Jesus, but he lived his human life in order to be able to be a sympathizing and effective leader in the work of salvation.
rwp@Hebrews:2:13 @{I will put my trust in him} (\Eg esomai pepoiths ep' auti\). A rare periphrastic (intransitive) future perfect of \peith\, a quotation from strkjv@Isaiah:8:17|. The author represents the Messiah as putting his trust in God as other men do (cf. strkjv@Hebrews:12:2|). Certainly Jesus did this constantly. The third quotation (\kai palin\, And again) is from strkjv@Isaiah:8:18| (the next verse), but the Messiah shows himself closely linked with the children (\paidia\) of God, the sons (\huioi\) of verse 10|.
rwp@Hebrews:4:4 @{Somewhere on this wise} (\pou houts\). See strkjv@2:6| for \pou tis\ for a like indefinite allusion to an Old Testament quotation. Here it is strkjv@Genesis:2:2| (cf. strkjv@Exodus:20:11; strkjv@31:17|). Moffatt notes that Philo quotes strkjv@Genesis:2:2| with the same "literary mannerism." {Rested} (\katepausen\). First aorist active indicative of \katapau\, intransitive here, but transitive in verse 8|. It is not, of course, absolute rest from all creative activity as Jesus shows in strkjv@John:5:17|. But the seventh day of God's rest was still going on (clearly not a twenty-four hour day).
rwp@Hebrews:12:17 @{Ye know} (\iste\). Regular form for the second person of \oida\ rather than the _Koin_ \oidate\. {He was rejected} (\apedokimasth\). First aorist passive indicative of \apodokimaz\, old verb to disapprove (Matthew:21:42|). {Place of repentance} (\metanoias topon\). \Metanoia\ is change of mind and purpose, not sorrow though he had tears (\meta dakrun\) afterwards as told in strkjv@Genesis:27:38|. He sought it (\autn\, the blessing \eulogian\) with tears, but in vain. There was no change of mind in Isaac. The choice was irrevocable as Isaac shows (Genesis:27:33|). Esau is a tragic example of one who does a wilful sin which allows no second chance (Hebrews:6:6; strkjv@10:26|). The author presses the case of Esau as a warning to the Christians who were tempted to give up Christ.
rwp@James:3:11 @{The fountain} (\h pg\). Old word for spring (John:4:14|). {Opening} (\ops\). Old word for fissure in the earth, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Hebrews:11:38| (caves). {Send forth} (\bruei\). Present active indicative of \bru\, old verb, to bubble up, to gush forth, here only in N.T. The use of \mti\ shows that a negative answer is expected in this rhetorical question. {The sweet and the bitter} (\to gluku kai to pikron\). Cognate accusatives with \bruei\. Separate articles to distinguish sharply the two things. The neuter singular articular adjective is a common way of presenting a quality. \Glukus\ is an old adjective (in N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:10:9f.|), the opposite of \pikron\ (from old root, to cut, to prick), in N.T. only here and verse 14| (sharp, harsh).
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 @ LIKE THE JOHANNINE EPISTLES Critics of all classes agree that, whoever was the author of the Fourth Gospel, the same man wrote the First Epistle of John. There is the same inimitable style, the same vocabulary, the same theological outlook. Undoubtedly the same author wrote also Second and Third John, for, brief as they are, they exhibit the same characteristics. In Second and Third John the author describes himself as "the Elder" (\ho presbuteros\), which fact has led some to argue for the mythical "Presbyter John" as the author in place of the Apostle John and so of First John and the Fourth Gospel. It is argued that the Apostle John would have termed himself "the Apostle John" after the fashion of Paul. But the example of the Apostle Peter disposes of that argument, for in addressing the elders (1Peter:5:1|) he calls himself "your fellow-elder" (\ho sunpresbuteros\). In the Epistles John opposes Gnosticism both of the Docetic type which denied the actual humanity of Jesus as in strkjv@1John:1:1-4| and the Cerinthian type which denied the identity of the man Jesus and the _aeon_ Christ which came on Jesus at his baptism and left him at his death on the Cross as in strkjv@1John:2:22|. One of the many stories told about John is his abhorrence of Cerinthus when found in the same public bath with him. As Westcott shows, the Epistles of John prove his actual humanity while assuming his deity, whereas the Fourth Gospel proves his deity while assuming his humanity.
rwp@John:1:17 @{Was given} (\edoth\). First aorist passive indicative of \didmi\. {By Moses} (\dia Muses\). "Through Moses" as the intermediate agent of God. {Came} (\egeneto\). The historical event, the beginning of Christianity. {By Jesus Christ} (\dia Isou Christou\). "Through Jesus Christ," the intermediate agent of God the Father. Here in plain terms John identifies the Pre-incarnate Logos with Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah. The full historical name "Jesus Christ" is here for the first time in John. See also strkjv@17:3| and four times in 1John and five times in Revelation. Without Christ there would have been no Christianity. John's theology is here pictured by the words "grace and truth" (\h charis kai h altheia\), each with the article and each supplementary to the other. It is grace in contrast with law as Paul sets forth in Galatians and Romans. Paul had made grace "a Christian commonplace" (Bernard) before John wrote. It is truth as opposed to Gnostic and all other heresy as Paul shows in Colossians and Ephesians. The two words aptly describe two aspects of the Logos and John drops the use of \Logos\ and \charis\, but clings to \altheia\ (see strkjv@8:32| for the freedom brought by truth), though the ideas in these three words run all through his Gospel.
rwp@John:1:25 @{Why then baptizest thou?} (\Ti oun baptizeis;\). In view of his repeated denials (three here mentioned). {If thou art not} (\ei su ouk ei\). Condition of first class. They did not interpret his claim to be "the voice" to be important enough to justify the ordinance of baptism. Abrahams (_Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels_) shows that proselyte baptism was probably practised before John's time, but its use by John was treating the Jews as if they were themselves Gentiles.
rwp@John:3:3 @{Except a man be born anew} (\ean m tis gennthi anthen\). Another condition of the third class, undetermined but with prospect of determination. First aorist passive subjunctive of \genna\. \Anthen\. Originally "from above" (Mark:15:38|), then "from heaven" (John:3:31|), then "from the first" (Luke:1:3|), and then "again" (\palin anthen\, strkjv@Galatians:4:9|). Which is the meaning here? The puzzle of Nicodemus shows (\deuteron\, verse 4|) that he took it as "again," a second birth from the womb. The Vulgate translates it by _renatus fuerit denuo_. But the misapprehension of Nicodemus does not prove the meaning of Jesus. In the other passages in John (3:31; strkjv@19:11,23|) the meaning is "from above" (\desuper\) and usually so in the Synoptics. It is a second birth, to be sure, regeneration, but a birth from above by the Spirit. {He cannot see the kingdom of God} (\ou dunatai idein tn basileian tou theou\). To participate in it as in strkjv@Luke:9:27|. For this use of \idein\ (second aorist active infinitive of \hora\) see strkjv@John:8:51; strkjv@Revelation:18:7|.
rwp@John:3:32 @{What he hath seen and heard} (\ho heraken kai kousen\). Perfect active indicative followed by aorist active indicative, because, as Westcott shows, the first belongs to the very existence of the Son and the latter to his mission. There is no confusion of tenses here. {No man} (\oudeis\). There were crowds coming to Jesus, but they do not really accept him as Saviour and Lord (1:11; strkjv@2:24|). It is superficial as time will show. But "no one" is not to be pressed too far, for it is the rhetorical use.
rwp@John:9:2 @{Who did sin?} (\tis hmarten;\). Second aorist active indicative of \hamartan\. See strkjv@Acts:3:2; strkjv@14:8| for two examples of lameness from birth. Blindness is common in the Orient and Jesus healed many cases (cf. strkjv@Mark:8:23; strkjv@10:46|) and mentions this fact as one of the marks of the Messiah in the message to the Baptist (Matthew:11:5|). This is the only example of congenital blindness healed. It is not clear that the disciples expected Jesus to heal this case. They are puzzled by the Jewish notion that sickness was a penalty for sin. The Book of Job:had shown that this was not always the case and Jesus shows it also (Luke:13:1-5|). If this man was guilty, it was due to prenatal sin on his part, a curious notion surely. The other alternative charged it upon his parents. That is sometimes true (Exodus:20:5|, etc.), but by no means always. The rabbinical casuists loved to split hairs on this problem. Ezekiel (Ezekiel:18:20|) says: "The soul that sinneth it shall die" (individual responsibility for sin committed). There is something in heredity, but not everything. {That he should be born blind} (\hina tuphlos gennthi\). Probably consecutive (or sub-final) use of \hina\ with first aorist passive subjunctive of \genna\.
rwp@John:11:50 @{That it is expedient for you} (\hoti sumpherei humin\). Indirect discourse with present active indicative of \sumpher\ used with the \hina\ clause as subject. It means to bear together, to be profitable, with the dative case as here (\humin\, for you). It is to your interest and that is what they cared most for. {That one man die} (\hina heis anthrpos apothani\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \apothnsk\ as subject clause with \sumpherei\. See strkjv@16:7; strkjv@18:7| for the same construction. {For the people} (\huper tou laou\). \Huper\ simply means _over_, but can be in behalf of as often, and in proper context the resultant idea is "instead of" as the succeeding clause shows and as is clearly so in strkjv@Galatians:3:13| of the death of Christ and naturally so in strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.; strkjv@Romans:5:6|. In the papyri \huper\ is the usual preposition used of one who writes a letter for one unable to write. {And that the whole nation perish not} (\kai m holon to ethnos apoltai\). Continuation of the \hina\ construction with \m\ and the second aorist subjunctive of \apollumi\. What Caiaphas has in mind is the giving of Jesus to death to keep the nation from perishing at the hands of the Romans. Politicians are often willing to make a sacrifice of the other fellow.
rwp@Info_Luke @ THE AUTHOR OF ACTS A COMPANION OF PAUL The proof of this position belongs to the treatment of Acts, but a word is needed here. The use of "we" and "us" in strkjv@Acts:16:10 and from strkjv@Acts:20:6| to the end of chapter strkjv@Acts:28| shows it beyond controversy if the same man wrote the "we" sections and the rest of the Acts. This proof Harnack has produced with painstaking detail in his _Date of the Acts and the Synoptic Gospels_ and in his volume _The Acts of the Apostles_ and in his _Luke the Physician_.
rwp@Info_Luke @ THIS COMPANION OF PAUL A PHYSICIAN The argument for this position lies in the use of medical terms throughout the Gospel and the Acts. Hobart in his _Medical Language of St. Luke_ proves that the author of both Gospel and Acts shows a fondness for medical terms best explained by the fact that he was a physician. Like most enthusiasts he overdid it and some of his proof does not stand the actual test of sifting. Harnack and Hawkins in his _Horae Synopticae_ have picked out the most pertinent items which will stand. Cadbury in his _Style and Literary Method of Luke_ denies that Luke uses Greek medical words more frequently in proportion than Josephus, Philo, Plutarch, or Lucian. It is to miss the point about Luke merely to count words. It is mainly the interest in medical things shown in Luke and Acts. The proof that Luke is the author of the books does not turn on this fact. It is merely confirmatory. Paul calls Luke "the beloved physician" (\ho iatros ho agaptos\, strkjv@Colossians:4:14|), "my beloved physician." Together they worked in the Island of Malta (Acts:28:8-10|) where many were healed and Luke shared with Paul in the appreciation of the natives who "came and were healed (\etherapeuonto\) who also honoured us with many honours." The implication there is that Paul wrought miracles of healing (\iasato\), while Luke practised his medical art also. Other notes of the physician's interest will be indicated in the discussion of details like his omitting Mark's apparent discredit of physicians (Mark:5:26|) by a milder and more general statement of a chronic case (Luke:8:43|).
rwp@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@Info_Luke @ THE CHARACTER OF THE BOOK Literary charm is here beyond dispute. It is a book that only a man with genuine culture and literary genius could write. It has all the simple grace of Mark and Matthew plus an indefinable quality not in these wonderful books. There is a delicate finish of detail and proportion of parts that give the balance and poise that come only from full knowledge of the subject, the chief element in a good style according to Dr. James Stalker. This scientific physician, this man of the schools, this converted Gentile, this devoted friend of Paul, comes to the study of the life of Christ with a trained intellect, with an historian's method of research, with a physician's care in diagnosis and discrimination, with a charm of style all his own, with reverence for and loyalty to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. One could not afford to give up either of the Four Gospels. They each supplement the other in a wonderful way. John's Gospel is the greatest book in all the world, reaching the highest heights of all. But if we had only Luke's Gospel, we should have an adequate portrait of Jesus Christ as Son of God and Son of Man. If Mark's is the Gospel for the Romans and Matthew's for the Jews, the Gospel of Luke is for the Gentile world. He shows the sympathy of Jesus for the poor and the outcast. Luke understands women and children and so is the universal Gospel of mankind in all phases and conditions. It is often called the Gospel of womanhood, of infancy, of prayer, of praise. We have in Luke the first Christian hymns. With Luke we catch some glimpses of the child Jesus for which we are grateful. Luke was a friend and follower of Paul, and verbal parallels with Paul's Epistles do occur, but there is no Pauline propaganda in the Gospel as Moffatt clearly shows (_Intr. to Lit. of the N.T._, p. 281). The Prologue is in literary _Koin_ and deserves comparison with those in any Greek and Latin writers. His style is versatile and is often coloured by his source. He was a great reader of the Septuagint as is shown by occasional Hebraisms evidently due to reading that translation Greek. He has graciousness and a sense of humour as McLachlan and Ragg show. Every really great man has a saving sense of humour as Jesus himself had. Ramsay dares to call Luke, as shown by the Gospel and Acts, the greatest of all historians not even excepting Thucydides. Ramsay has done much to restore Luke to his rightful place in the estimation of modern scholars. Some German critics used to cite strkjv@Luke:2:1-7| as a passage containing more historical blunders than any similar passage in any historian. The story of how papyri and inscriptions have fully justified Luke in every statement here made is carefully worked out by Ramsay in his various books, especially in _The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament_. The main feature of this proof appears also in my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_. Songs:many items, where Luke once stood alone, have been confirmed by recent discoveries that the burden of proof now rests on those who challenge Luke in those cases where he still stands alone.
rwp@Luke:1:3 @{It seemed good to me also} (\edoxe kamoi\). A natural conclusion and justification of Luke's decision to write his narrative. They had ample reason to draw up their narratives. Luke has more reason to do so because of his fuller knowledge and wider scope. {Having traced the course of all things} (\parkolouthkoti psin\). The perfect active participle of a common verb of the ancient Greek. Literally it means to follow along a thing in mind, to trace carefully. Both meanings occur abundantly in the ancient Greek. Cadbury (Appendix C to _Beginnings of Christianity_, Vol. II, pp. 489ff.) objects to the translation "having traced" here as implying research which the word does not here mean. Milligan (_Vocabulary_) is somewhat impressed by this argument. See my discussion of the point in Chapter XVI of _Studies in the Text of the N.T._ (The Implications in Luke's Preface) where the point is made that Luke here claims fulness of knowledge before he began to write his book. He had the traditions of the eyewitnesses and ministers of the word and the narratives previously drawn up. Whether he was a personal contemporary with any or all of these events we do not know and it is not particularly pertinent. He had _mentally_ followed along by the side of these events. Galen used this verb for the investigation of symptoms. Luke got himself ready to write before he began by full and accurate knowledge of the subject. \Akribs\ (accurately) means going into minute details, from \akron\, the topmost point. And he did it {from the first} (\anthen\). He seems to refer to the matters in Chapters strkjv@1:5-2:52|, the Gospel of the Infancy. {In order} (\kathexs\). Chronological order in the main following Mark's general outline. But in strkjv@9:51-18:10| the order is often topical. He has made careful investigation and his work deserves serious consideration. {Most excellent Theophilus} (\kratiste Theophile\). The name means god-lover or god-beloved. He may have been a believer already. He was probably a Gentile. Ramsay holds that "most excellent" was a title like "Your Excellency" and shows that he held office, perhaps a Knight. Songs:of Felix (Acts:23:26|) and Festus (Acts:26:25|). The adjective does not occur in the dedication in strkjv@Acts:1:1|.
rwp@Luke:2:5 @{To enrol himself with Mary} (\apograpsasthai sun Mariam\). Direct middle. "With Mary" is naturally taken with the infinitive as here. If so, that means that Mary's family register was in Bethlehem also and that she also belonged to the house of David. It is possible to connect "with Mary" far back with "went up" (\aneb\) in verse 4|, but it is unnatural to do so. There is no real reason for doubting that Mary herself was a descendant of David and that is the obvious way to understand Luke's genealogy of Jesus in strkjv@Luke:3:23-38|). The Syriac Sinaitic expressly says that both Joseph and Mary were of the house and city of David. {Betrothed} (\emnsteumenn\). Same verb as in strkjv@1:27|, but here it really means "married" or "espoused" as strkjv@Matthew:1:24f.| shows. Otherwise she could not have travelled with Joseph. {Great with child} (\enkui\). Only here in N.T. Common Greek word.
rwp@Luke:3:16 @{He that is mightier than I} (\ho ischuroteros mou\). Like strkjv@Mark:1:7|, "the one mightier than I." Ablative case (\mou\) of comparison. John would not turn aside for the flattery of the crowd. He was able to take his own measure in comparison with the Messiah and was loyal to him (see my _John the Loyal_). Compare strkjv@Luke:3:16| with strkjv@Mark:1:7f.| and strkjv@Matthew:3:11f.| for discussion of details. Luke has "fire" here after "baptize with the Holy Ghost" as strkjv@Matthew:3:11|, which see. This bold Messianic picture in the Synoptic Gospels shows that John saw the Messiah's coming as a judgment upon the world like fire and the fan of the thrashing-floor, and with unquenchable fire for the chaff (Luke:3:17; strkjv@Matthew:3:12|). But he had the spiritual conception also, the baptism in the Holy Spirit which will characterize the Messiah's Mission and so will far transcend the water baptism which marked the ministry of John.
rwp@Luke:3:19 @{Reproved} (\elegchomenos\). Present passive participle of \elegch\, an old verb meaning in Homer to treat with contempt, then to convict (Matthew:18:15|), to expose (Ephesians:5:11|), to reprove as here. The substantive \elegchos\ means proof (Hebrews:11:1|) and \elegmos\, censure (2Timothy:3:16|). Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. V.4) shows how repulsive this marriage was to Jewish feeling. {Evil things} (\ponrn\). Incorporated into the relative sentence. The word is from \ponos, pone\, toil, work, and gives the active side of evil, possibly with the notion of work itself as evil or at least an annoyance. The "evil eye" (\ophthalmos ponros\ in strkjv@Mark:7:22|) was a "mischief working eye" (Vincent). In strkjv@Matthew:6:23| it is a diseased eye. Songs:Satan is "the evil one" (Matthew:5:37; strkjv@6:13|, etc.). It is a very common adjective in the N.T. as in the older Greek. {Had done} (\epoisen\). Aorist active indicative, not past perfect, merely a summary constative aorist, {he did}.
rwp@Luke:5:17 @{That} (\kai\). Use of \kai\ = \hoti\ (that) like the Hebrew _wav_, though found in Greek also. {He} (\autos\). Luke sometimes has \autos\ in the nominative as unemphatic "he" as here, not "he himself." {Was teaching} (\n didaskn\). Periphrastic imperfect again like our English idiom. {Were sitting by} (\san kathmenoi\). Periphrastic imperfect again. There is no "by" in the Greek. {Doctors of the law} (\nomodidaskaloi\). A compound word formed after analogy of \hierodidaskalos\, but not found outside of the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, one of the very few words apparently N.T. in usage. It appears here and strkjv@Acts:5:34; strkjv@1Timothy:1:7|. It is not likely that Luke and Paul made the word, but they simply used the term already in current use to describe teachers and interpreters of the law. Our word "doctor" is Latin for "teacher." These "teachers of the law" are called elsewhere in the Gospels "scribes" (\grammateis\) as in Matthew and Mark (see on ¯Matthew:5:20; strkjv@23:34|) and strkjv@Luke:5:21; strkjv@19:47; strkjv@21:1; strkjv@22:2|. Luke also employs \nomikos\ (one skilled in the law, \nomos\) as in strkjv@10:25|. One thinks of our LL.D. (Doctors of Civil and Canon Law), for both were combined in Jewish law. They were usually Pharisees (mentioned here for the first time in Luke) for which see on ¯Matthew:3:7,20|. Luke will often speak of the Pharisees hereafter. Not all the "Pharisees" were "teachers of the law" so that both terms often occur together as in verse 21| where Luke has separate articles (\hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi\), distinguishing between them, though one article may occur as in strkjv@Matthew:5:20| or no article as here in verse 17|. Luke alone mentions the presence here of these Pharisees and doctors of the law "which were come" (\hoi san elluthotes\, periphrastic past perfect active, {had come}). {Out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem} (\ek pass kms ts Galilaias kai Ioudaias kai Ierousalm\). Edersheim (_Jewish Social Life_) observes that the Jews distinguished Jerusalem as a separate district in Judea. Plummer considers it hyperbole in Luke to use "every village." But one must recall that Jesus had already made one tour of Galilee which stirred the Pharisees and rabbis to active opposition. Judea had already been aroused and Jerusalem was the headquarters of the definite campaign now organized against Jesus. One must bear in mind that strkjv@John:4:1-4| shows that Jesus had already left Jerusalem and Judea because of the jealousy of the Pharisees. They are here on purpose to find fault and to make charges against Jesus. One must not forget that there were many kinds of Pharisees and that not all of them were as bad as these legalistic and punctilious hypocrites who deserved the indictment and exposure of Christ in strkjv@Matthew:23|. Paul himself is a specimen of the finer type of Pharisee which, however, developed into the persecuting fanatic till Jesus changed his whole life. {The power of the Lord was with him to heal} (\dunamis Kuriou n eis to isthai auton\). Songs:the best texts. It is neat Greek, but awkward English: "Then was the power of the Lord for the healing as to him (Jesus)." Here \Kuriou\ refers to Jehovah. {Dunamis} (dynamite) is one of the common words for "miracles" (\dunameis\). What Luke means is that Jesus had the power of the Lord God to heal with. He does not mean that this power was intermittent. He simply calls attention to its presence with Jesus on this occasion.
rwp@Luke:5:30 @{The Pharisees and their scribes} (\hoi Pharisaioi kai hoi grammateis autn\). Note article with each substantive and the order, not "scribes and Pharisees," but "the Pharisees and the scribes of them" (the Pharisees). Some manuscripts omit "their," but strkjv@Mark:2:16| (the scribes of the Pharisees) shows that it is correct here. Some of the scribes were Sadducees. It is only the Pharisees who find fault here. {Murmured} (\egogguzon\). Imperfect active. Picturesque onomatopoetic word that sounds like its meaning. A late word used of the cooing of doves. It is like the buzzing of bees, like \tonthorruz\ of literary Greek. They were not invited to this feast and would not have come if they had been. But, not being invited, they hang on the outside and criticize the disciples of Jesus for being there. The crowd was so large that the feast may have been served out in the open court at Levi's house, a sort of reclining garden party. {The publicans and sinners} (\tn telnn kai hamartln\). Here Luke is quoting the criticism of the critics. Note one article making one group of all of them.
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:7:40 @{Answering} (\apokritheis\). First aorist passive participle, redundant use with \eipen\. Jesus answers the thoughts and doubts of Simon and so shows that he knows all about the woman also. Godet notes a tone of Socratic irony here.
rwp@Luke:8:24 @{Master, Master} (\Epistata, epistata\). See on ¯Luke:5:5| for discussion. strkjv@Mark:4:38| has {Teacher} (\Didaskale\), strkjv@Matthew:8:25| has {Lord} (\Kurie\). The repetition here shows the uneasiness of the disciples. {We perish} (\apollumetha\). Songs:in strkjv@Mark:4:38; strkjv@Matthew:8:25|. Linear present middle indicative, we are perishing. {The raging of the water} (\ti kludoni tou hudatos\). \Kludn\, common Greek word, is a boisterous surge, a violent agitation. Here only in the N.T. save strkjv@James:1:6|. \Kuma\ (Mark:4:37|) is the regular swell or wave. A {calm} (\galn\). Only in the parallels in the N.T., though common word. Here strkjv@Mark:4:39; strkjv@Matthew:8:26| add {great} (\megal\). {That} (\hoti\). This use of \hoti\ as explanatory of the demonstrative pronoun \houtos\ occurs in the parallels strkjv@Mark:4:36; strkjv@Matthew:8:27| and also in strkjv@Luke:4:36|. It is almost result. {He commandeth} (\epitassei\). Peculiar to Luke.
rwp@Luke:8:32 @{A herd of many swine} (\agel choirn hikann\). Word {herd} (\agel\) old as Homer, but in N.T. only here and parallels (Mark:5:11; strkjv@Matthew:8:30|). Luke shows his fondness for adjective \hikanos\ here again (see verse 27|) where Mark has \megal\ and Matthew \polln\.
rwp@Luke:9:37 @{On the next day} (\ti hexs hmeri\). Alone in Luke. It shows that the Transfiguration took place on the preceding night. {They were come down} (\katelthontn autn\). Genitive absolute of second aorist active participle of \katerchomai\, a common enough verb, but in the N.T. only in Luke's writings save strkjv@James:3:15|. {Met him} (\sunntsen auti\). First aorist active of \sunanta\, common compound verb, to meet with, only in Luke's writings in the N.T. save strkjv@Hebrews:7:1|. With associative instrumental case \auti\.
rwp@Luke:10:25 @{And tempted him} (\ekpeirazn auton\). Present active participle, conative idea, trying to tempt him. There is no "and" in the Greek. He "stood up (\anest\, ingressive second aorist active) trying to tempt him." \Peiraz\ is a late form of \peira\ and \ekpeiraz\ apparently only in the LXX, and N.T. (quoted by Jesus from strkjv@Deuteronomy:6:16| in strkjv@Matthew:4:7; strkjv@Luke:4:12| against Satan). Here and strkjv@1Corinthians:10:9|. The spirit of this lawyer was evil. He wanted to entrap Jesus if possible. {What shall I do to inherit eternal life?} (\Ti poisas zn ainiou klronoms;\). Literally, "By doing what shall I inherit eternal life?" Note the emphasis on "doing" (\poisas\). The form of his question shows a wrong idea as to how to get it. {Eternal life} (\zn ainion\) is endless life as in John's Gospel (John:16:9; strkjv@18:18,30|) and in strkjv@Matthew:25:46|, which see.
rwp@Luke:10:27 @{And he answering} (\ho de apokritheis\). First aorist participle, no longer passive in idea. The lawyer's answer is first from the _Shema_ (Deuteronomy:6:3; strkjv@11:13|) which was written on the phylacteries. The second part is from strkjv@Leviticus:19:18| and shows that the lawyer knew the law. At a later time Jesus himself in the temple gives a like summary of the law to a lawyer (Mark:12:28-34; strkjv@Matthew:22:34-40|) who wanted to catch Jesus by his question. There is no difficulty in the two incidents. God is to be loved with all of man's four powers (heart, soul, strength, mind) here as in strkjv@Mark:12:30|.
rwp@Luke:11:11 @{Of which of you that is a father} (\tina de ex humn ton patera\). There is a decided anacoluthon here. The MSS. differ a great deal. The text of Westcott and Hort makes \ton patera\ (the father) in apposition with \tina\ (of whom) and in the accusative the object of \aitsei\ (shall ask) which has also another accusative (both person and thing) "a loaf." Songs:far so good. But the rest of the sentence is, {will ye give him a stone?} (\m lithon epidsei auti;\). \M\ shows that the answer No is expected, but the trouble is that the interrogative \tina\ in the first clause is in the accusative the object of \aitsei\ while here the same man (he) is the subject of \epidsei\. It is a very awkward piece of Greek and yet it is intelligible. Some of the old MSS. do not have the part about "loaf" and "stone," but only the two remaining parts about "fish" and "serpent," "egg" and "scorpion." The same difficult construction is carried over into these questions also.
rwp@Luke:11:49 @{The wisdom of God} (\h sophia tou theou\). In strkjv@Matthew:23:34| Jesus uses "I send" (\eg apostell\) without this phrase "the wisdom of God." There is no book to which it can refer. Jesus is the wisdom of God as Paul shows (1Corinthians:1:30|), but it is hardly likely that he so describes himself here. Probably he means that God in his wisdom said, but even so "Jesus here speaks with confident knowledge of the Divine counsels" (Plummer). See strkjv@Luke:10:22; strkjv@15:7,10|. Here the future tense occurs, "I will send" (\apostel\). {Some of them} (\ex autn\). No "some" (\tinas\) in the Greek, but understood. They will act as their fathers did. They will kill and persecute.
rwp@Luke:12:14 @{A judge or a divider} (\kritn meristn\). Jesus repudiates the position of judge or arbiter in this family fuss. The language reminds one of strkjv@Exodus:2:14|. Jesus is rendering unto Caesar the things of Caesar (Luke:20:25|) and shows that his kingdom is not of this world (John:18:36|). The word for divider or arbiter (\merists\) is a late word from \merizomai\ (verse 13|) and occurs here only in the N.T.
rwp@Luke:12:19 @{Laid up for many years} (\keimena eis et polla\). Not in D and some other Latin MSS. The man's apostrophe to his "soul" (\psuch\) is thoroughly Epicurean, for his soul feeds on his goods. The asyndeton here (take thine ease, eat, drink, be merry) shows his eagerness. Note difference in tenses (\anapauou\, keep on resting, \phage\, eat at once, \pie\, drink thy fill, \euphrainou\, keep on being merry), first and last presents, the other two aorists.
rwp@Luke:13:32 @{That fox} (\ti alpeki tauti\). This epithet for the cunning and cowardice of Herod shows clearly that Jesus understood the real attitude and character of the man who had put John the Baptist to death and evidently wanted to get Jesus into his power in spite of his superstitious fears that he might be John the Baptist _redivivus_. The message of Jesus means that he is independent of the plots and schemes of both Herod and the Pharisees. The preacher is often put in a tight place by politicians who are quite willing to see him shorn of all real power. {Cures} (\iaseis\). Old word, but in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:4:22,30|. {I am perfected} (\teleioumai\). Present passive indicative of \teleio\, old verb from \teleios\, to bring to perfection, frequent in the N.T. Used in strkjv@Hebrews:2:10| of the Father's purpose in the humanity of Christ. Perfect humanity is a process and Jesus was passing through that, without sin, but not without temptation and suffering. It is the prophetic present with the sense of the future.
rwp@Luke:14:16 @{Made} (\epoiei\). Imperfect active, was on the point of making (inchoative). {Great supper} (\deipnon\). Or dinner, a formal feast. Jesus takes up the conventional remark of the guest and by this parable shows that such an attitude was no guarantee of godliness (Bruce). This parable of the marriage of the King's son (Luke:14:15-24|) has many points of likeness to the parable of the wedding garment (Matthew:22:1-14|) and as many differences also. The occasions are very different, that in Matthew grows out of the attempt to arrest Jesus while this one is due to the pious comment of a guest at the feast and the wording is also quite different. Hence we conclude that they are distinct parables. {And he bade many} (\kai ekalesen pollous\). Aorist active, a distinct and definite act following the imperfect \epoiei\.
rwp@Luke:15:2 @{Both... and} (\te... kai\). United in the complaint. {Murmured} (\diegogguzon\). Imperfect active of \diagogguz\, late Greek compound in the LXX and Byzantine writers. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:19:7|. The force of \dia\ here is probably between or among themselves. It spread (imperfect tense) whenever these two classes came in contact with Jesus. As the publicans and the sinners were drawing near to Jesus just in that proportion the Pharisees and the scribes increased their murmurings. The social breach is here an open yawning chasm. {This man} (\houtos\). A contemptuous sneer in the use of the pronoun. They spoke out openly and probably pointed at Jesus. {Receiveth} (\prosdechetai\). Present middle indicative of the common verb \prosdechomai\. In strkjv@12:36| we had it for expecting, here it is to give access to oneself, to welcome like \hupedexato\ of Martha's welcome to Jesus (Luke:10:38|). The charge here is that this is the habit of Jesus. He shows no sense of social superiority to these outcasts (like the Hindu "untouchables" in India). {And eateth with them} (\kai sunesthiei autois\). Associative instrumental case (\autois\) after \sun-\ in composition. This is an old charge (Luke:5:30|) and a much more serious breach from the standpoint of the Pharisees. The implication is that Jesus prefers these outcasts to the respectable classes (the Pharisees and the scribes) because he is like them in character and tastes, even with the harlots. There was a sting in the charge that he was the "friend" (\philos\) of publicans and sinners (Luke:7:34|).
rwp@Luke:15:20 @{To his father} (\pros ton patera heautou\). Literally, to his own father. He acted at once on his decision. {Yet afar off} (\eti autou makran apechontos\). Genitive absolute. \Makran\ agrees with \hodon\ understood: While he was yet holding off a distant way. This shows that the father had been looking for him to come back and was even looking at this very moment as he came in sight. {Ran} (\dramn\). Second aorist active participle of the defective verb \trech\. The eager look and longing of the father. {Kissed} (\katephilsen\). Note perfective use of \kata\ kissed him much, kissed him again and again. The verb occurs so in the older Greek.
rwp@Luke:16:19 @{He was clothed} (\enedidusketo\). Imperfect middle of \endidusk\, a late intensive form of \endu\. He clothed himself in or with. It was his habit. {Purple} (\porphuran\). This purple dye was obtained from the purple fish, a species of mussel or \murex\ (1Macc. strkjv@4:23). It was very costly and was used for the upper garment by the wealthy and princes (royal purple). They had three shades of purple (deep violet, deep scarlet or crimson, deep blue). See also strkjv@Mark:15:17,20; strkjv@Revelation:18:12|. {Fine linen} (\busson\). {Byssus} or Egyptian flax (India and Achaia also). It is a yellowed flax from which fine linen was made for undergarments. It was used for wrapping mummies. "Some of the Egyptian linen was so fine that it was called _woven air_" (Vincent). Here only in the N.T. for the adjective \bussinos\ occurs in strkjv@Revelation:18:12; strkjv@19:8,14|. {Faring sumptuously} (\euphrainomenos lamprs\). {Making merry brilliantly}. The verb \euphrainomai\ we have already had in strkjv@12:19; strkjv@15:23,25,32|. \Lamprs\ is an old adverb from \lampros\, brilliant, shining, splendid, magnificent. It occurs here only in the N.T. This parable apparently was meant for the Pharisees (verse 14|) who were lovers of money. It shows the wrong use of money and opportunity.
rwp@Luke:18:38 @{He cried} (\ebosen\). Old verb, \boa\, to shout, as in strkjv@9:38|. {Son of David} (\huie Daueid\). Shows that he recognizes Jesus as the Messiah.
rwp@Luke:19:25 @{And they said unto him} (\kai eipan auti\). Probably the eager audience who had been listening to this wonderful parable interrupted Jesus at this point because of this sudden turn when the one pound is given to the man who has ten pounds. If so, it shows plainly how keenly they followed the story which Jesus was giving because of their excitement about the kingdom (Luke:19:11|).
rwp@Luke:20:19 @{To lay hands on him} (\epibalein ep' auton tas cheiras\). Second aorist active infinitive of \epiball\, an old verb and either transitively as here or intransitively as in strkjv@Mark:4:37|. Vivid picture here where strkjv@Mark:12:12; strkjv@Matthew:21:46| has "to seize" (\kratsai\). {In that very hour} (\en auti ti hri\). Luke's favourite idiom, in the hour itself. Not in Mark or Matthew and shows that the Sanhedrin were angry enough to force the climax then. {And they feared} (\kai ephobthsan\). Adversative use of \kai\ = but they feared. Hence they refrained. {For they perceived} (\egnsan gar\). The reason for their rage. Second aorist active indicative of \ginsk\. {Against them} (\pros autous\). As in strkjv@Mark:12:12|. The cap fitted them and they saw it.
rwp@Luke:21:14 @{Not to meditate beforehand} (\m promeletin\). The classical word for conning a speech beforehand. strkjv@Mark:13:11| has \promerimna\, a later word which shows previous anxiety rather than previous preparation. {How to answer} (\apologthnai\). First aorist passive infinitive. It is the preparation for the speech of defence (apology) that Jesus here forbids, not the preparation of a sermon.
rwp@Luke:21:24 @{Edge of the sword} (\stomati machairs\). Instrumental case of \stomati\ which means "mouth" literally (Genesis:34:26|). This verse like the close of verse 22| is only in Luke. Josephus (_War_, VI. 9.3) states that 1,100,000 Jews perished in the destruction of Jerusalem and 97,000 were taken captive. Surely this is an exaggeration and yet the number must have been large. {Shall be led captive} (\aichmaltisthsontai\). Future passive of \aichmaltiz\ from \aichm\, spear and \haltos\ (\haliskomai\). Here alone in the literal sense in the N.T. {Shall be trodden under foot} (\estai patoumen\). Future passive periphrastic of \pate\, to tread, old verb. {Until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled} (\achri hou plrthsin kairoi ethnn\). First aorist passive subjunctive with \achri hou\ like \hes hou\. What this means is not clear except that Paul in strkjv@Romans:11:25| shows that the punishment of the Jews has a limit. The same idiom appears there also with \achri hou\ and the aorist subjunctive.
rwp@Luke:23:34 @{Father forgive them} (\Pater, aphes autois\). Second aorist active imperative of \aphimi\, with dative case. Some of the oldest and best documents do not contain this verse, and yet, while it is not certain that it is a part of Luke's Gospel, it is certain that Jesus spoke these words, for they are utterly unlike any one else. Jesus evidently is praying for the Roman soldiers, who were only obeying, but not for the Sanhedrin. {Cast lots} (\ebalon klron\). Second aorist active indicative of \ball\. See strkjv@Mark:15:24; strkjv@Matthew:27:35|. strkjv@John:19:23f|. shows how the lot was cast for the seamless garment, the four soldiers dividing the other garments.
rwp@Luke:23:52 @{Asked for} (\itsato\). First aorist middle (indirect) indicative as in strkjv@Mark:15:43; strkjv@Matthew:27:58|. The middle voice shows that Joseph of Arimathea asked the body of Jesus as a personal favour.
rwp@Mark:2:17 @{The righteous} (\dikaious\). Jesus for the sake of argument accepts the claim of the Pharisees to be righteous, though, as a matter of fact, they fell very far short of it. Elsewhere (Matthew:23|) Jesus shows that the Pharisees were extortionate and devoured widows' houses and wore a cloak of pride and hypocritical respectability. The words "unto repentance" (\eis metanoian\) are not genuine in Mark, but are in strkjv@Luke:5:32|. Jesus called men to new spiritual life and away from sin and so to repentance. But this claim stopped their mouths against what Jesus was doing. The well or the strong (\ischuontes\) are not those who need the physician in an epidemic.
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:4:37 @{There ariseth a great storm of wind} (\ginetai lailaps megal anemou\). Mark's vivid historical present again. strkjv@Matthew:8:24| has \egeneto\ (arose) and strkjv@Luke:8:23| \kateb\ (came down). Luke has also \lailaps\, but Matthew \seismos\ (tempest), a violent upheaval like an earthquake. \Lailaps\ is an old word for these cyclonic gusts or storms. Luke's "came down" shows that the storm fell suddenly from Mount Hermon down into the Jordan Valley and smote the Sea of Galilee violently at its depth of 682 feet below the Mediterranean Sea. The hot air at this depth draws the storm down with sudden power. These sudden storms continue to this day on the Sea of Galilee. The word occurs in the LXX of the whirlwind out of which God answered Job:(Job:38:1|) and in strkjv@Jonah:1:4|. {The waves beat into the boat} (\ta kumata epeballen eis to ploion\). Imperfect tense (were beating) vividly picturing the rolling over the sides of the boat "so that the boat was covered with the waves" (Matthew:8:24|). Mark has it: "insomuch that the boat was now filling" (\hste d gemizesthai to ploion\). Graphic description of the plight of the disciples.
rwp@Mark:5:8 @{For he said} (\elegen gar\). For he had been saying (progressive imperfect). Jesus had already repeatedly ordered the demon to come out of the man whereat the demon made his outcry to Jesus and protested. strkjv@Matthew:8:29| had "before the time" (\pro kairou\) and strkjv@8:31| shows that the demons did not want to go back to the abyss (\tn abusson\) right now. That was their real home, but they did not wish to return to the place of torment just now.
rwp@Mark:6:2 @{Began to teach} (\rxato didaskein\). As was now his custom in the synagogue on the sabbath. The ruler of the synagogue (\archisunaggos\, see strkjv@Matthew:5:22|) would ask some one to speak whensoever he wished. The reputation of Jesus all over Galilee opened the door for him. Jesus may have gone to Nazareth for rest, but could not resist this opportunity for service. {Whence hath this man these things?} (\Pothen touti tauta;\). Laconic and curt, {Whence these things to this fellow?} With a sting and a fling in their words as the sequel shows. They continued to be amazed (\exeplssonto\, imperfect tense passive). They challenge both the apparent {wisdom} (\sophia\) with which he spoke and {the mighty works} or powers (\hai dunameis\) {such as those} (\toiautai\) {coming to pass} (\ginomenai\, present middle participle, repeatedly wrought) {by his hands} (\dia tn cheirn\). They felt that there was some hocus-pocus about it somehow and somewhere. They do not deny the wisdom of his words, nor the wonder of his works, but the townsmen knew Jesus and they had never suspected that he possessed such gifts and graces.
rwp@Mark:7:4 @{From the marketplace} (\ap' agoras\). Ceremonial defilement was inevitable in the mixing with men in public. This \agora\ from \ageir\ to collect or gather, was a public forum in every town where the people gathered like the courthouse square in American towns. The disciples were already ceremonially defiled. {Wash themselves} (\baptisntai\). First aorist middle subjunctive of \baptiz\, dip or immerse. Westcott and Hort put \rantisntai\ in the text translated "sprinkle themselves" in the margin of the Revised Version, because Aleph, B, and some of the best cursives have it. Gould terms \rantisntai\ "a manifest emendation," to get rid of the difficulty of dipping or bathing the whole body. Meyer says: "The statement proceeds by way of climax: before eating they wash the hands always. When they come from market they take a bath before eating." This is not the place to enter into any controversy about the meaning of \baptiz\, to dip, \rantiz\, to sprinkle, and \ecche\, to pour, all used in the New Testament. The words have their distinctive meanings here as elsewhere. Some scribes felt a difficulty about the use of \baptisntai\ here. The Western and Syrian classes of manuscripts add "and couches" (\kai klinn\) at the end of the sentence. Swete considers the immersions of beds (\baptismous klinn\) "an incongruous combination." But Gould says: "Edersheim shows that the Jewish ordinance required immersions, \baptismous\, of these vessels." We must let the Jewish scrupulosity stand for itself, though "and couches" is not supported by Aleph, B L D Bohairic, probably not genuine.
rwp@Mark:7:8 @{Ye leave the commandment of God} (\aphentes tn entoln tou theou\). Note the sharp contrast between the command of God and the traditions of men. Jesus here drives a keen wedge into the Pharisaic contention. They had covered up the Word of God with their oral teaching. Jesus here shows that they care more for the oral teaching of the scribes and elders than for the written law of God. The Talmud gives abundant and specific confirmation of the truthfulness of this indictment.
rwp@Mark:7:29 @{For this saying} (\dia touton ton logon\). She had faith, great faith as strkjv@Matthew:15:28| shows, but it was her quick and bright repartee that pleased Jesus. He had missed his rest, but it was worth it to answer a call like this.
rwp@Mark:7:37 @{He hath done all things well} (\Kals panta pepoiken\). The present perfect active shows the settled convictions of these people about Jesus. Their great amazement (\huperperisss exeplssonto\), imperfect passive and compound adverb, thus found expression in a vociferous championship of Jesus in this pagan land.
rwp@Mark:8:32 @{Spake the saying openly} (\parrsii ton logon elalei\). He held back nothing, told it all (\pn\, all, \rsia\, from \eipon\, say), without reserve, to all of them. Imperfect tense \elalei\ shows that Jesus did it repeatedly. Mark alone gives this item. Mark does not give the great eulogy of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:17,19| after his confession (Mark:8:29; strkjv@Matthew:16:16; strkjv@Luke:9:20|), but he does tell the stinging rebuke given Peter by Jesus on this occasion. See discussion on ¯Matthew:16:21,26|.
rwp@Mark:9:8 @{Suddenly looking round about} (\exapina periblepsamenoi\). strkjv@Matthew:17:8| has it "lifting up their eyes." Mark is more graphic. The sudden glance around on the mountain side when the cloud with Moses and Elijah was gone. {Jesus only with themselves} (\meth' heautn ei m Isoun monon\). Mark shows their surprise at the situation. They were sore afraid (Matthew:17:6|) before Jesus touched them.
rwp@Mark:16:13 @{Neither believed they them} (\oude ekeinois episteusan\). The men fared no better than the women. But Luke's report of the two on the way to Emmaus is to the effect that they met a hearty welcome by them in Jerusalem (Luke:24:33-35|). This shows the independence of the two narratives on this point. There was probably an element who still discredited all the resurrection stories as was true on the mountain in Galilee later when "some doubted" (Matthew:28:17|).
rwp@Info_Matthew @ Plummer shows the broad general plan of both Mark and Matthew to be the same as follows: Introduction to the Gospel: strkjv@Mark:1:1-13; strkjv@Matthew:3:1-4:11|.
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:1:21 @{Thou shalt call his name Jesus} (\Kalesies to onoma autou Isoun\). The rabbis named six whose names were given before birth: "Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and the name of the Messiah, whom may the Holy One, blessed be His name, bring in our day." The angel puts it up to Joseph as the putative father to name the child. "Jesus is the same as Joshua, a contraction of Jehoshuah (Numbers:13:16; strkjv@1Chronicles:7:27|), signifying in Hebrew, 'Jehovah is helper,' or 'Help of Jehovah'" (Broadus). Songs:Jesus is the Greek form of Joshua (Hebrews:4:8|). He is another Joshua to lead the true people of God into the Promised Land. The name itself was common enough as Josephus shows. Jehovah is Salvation as seen in Joshua for the Hebrews and in Jesus for all believers. "The meaning of the name, therefore, finds expression in the title _Saviour_ applied to our Lord (Luke:1:47; strkjv@2:11; strkjv@John:4:42|)" (Vincent). He will save (\ssei\) his people from their sins and so be their Saviour (\Str\). He will be prophet, priest, and king, but "Saviour" sums it all up in one word. The explanation is carried out in the promise, "for he is the one who (\autos\) will save (\ssei\ with a play on the name Jesus) his people from their sins." Paul will later explain that by the covenant people, the children of promise, God means the spiritual Israel, all who believe whether Jews or Gentiles. This wonderful word touches the very heart of the mission and message of the Messiah. Jesus himself will show that the kingdom of heaven includes all those and only those who have the reign of God in their hearts and lives. {From their sins} (\apo tn hamartin autn\). Both sins of omission and of commission. The substantive (\hamartia\) is from the verb (\hamartanein\) and means missing the mark as with an arrow. How often the best of us fall short and fail to score. Jesus will save us away from (\apo\) as well as out of (\ex\) our sins. They will be cast into oblivion and he will cover them up out of sight.
rwp@Matthew:2:1 @{In the days of Herod the King} (\en hmerais Hridou tou Basiles\). This is the only date for the birth of Christ given by Matthew. Luke gives a more precise date in his Gospel (Luke:2:1-3|), the time of the first enrolment by Augustus and while Cyrenius was ruler of Syria. More will be said of Luke's date when we come to his Gospel. We know from Matthew that Jesus was born while Herod was king, the Herod sometimes called Herod the Great. Josephus makes it plain that Herod died B.C. 4. He was first Governor of Galilee, but had been king of Judaea since B.C. 40 (by Antony and Octavius). I call him "Herod the Great Pervert" in _Some Minor Characters in the New Testament_. He was great in sin and in cruelty and had won the favour of the Emperor. The story in Josephus is a tragedy. It is not made plain by Matthew how long before the death of Herod Jesus was born. Our traditional date A.D. 1, is certainly wrong as Matthew shows. It seems plain that the birth of Jesus cannot be put later than B.C. 5. The data supplied by Luke probably call for B.C. 6 or 7.
rwp@Matthew:3:1 @{And in those days cometh John the Baptist} (\en de tais hmerais paraginetai Ians ho Baptists\). Here the synoptic narrative begins with the baptism of John (Mt. strkjv@3:1; strkjv@Mark:1:2; strkjv@Luke:3:1|) as given by Peter in strkjv@Acts:1:22|, "from the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received up from us" (cf. also strkjv@Acts:10:37-43|, Peter's summary to Cornelius very much like the outline of Mark's Gospel). Matthew does not indicate the date when John appeared as Luke does in ch. 3 (the fifteenth year of Tiberius's reign). It was some thirty years after the birth of John, precisely how long after the return of Joseph and Mary to Nazareth we do not know. Moffatt translates the verb (\paraginetai\) "came on the scene," but it is the historical present and calls for a vivid imagination on the part of the reader. There he is as he comes forward, makes his appearance. His name John means "Gift of Jehovah" (cf. German _Gotthold_) and is a shortened form of Johanan. He is described as "the Baptist," "the Baptizer" for that is the rite that distinguishes him. The Jews probably had proselyte baptism as I. Abrahams shows (_Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels_, p. 37). But this rite was meant for the Gentiles who accepted Judaism. John is treating the Jews as Gentiles in demanding baptism at their hands on the basis of repentance.
rwp@Matthew:4:7 @{Thou shall not tempt} (\ouk ekpeiraseis\). Jesus quotes Deuteronomy again (Deuteronomy:6:16|) and shows that the devil has wholly misapplied God's promise of protection.
rwp@Matthew:5:3 @{Blessed} (\makarioi\). The English word "blessed" is more exactly represented by the Greek verbal \eulogtoi\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:68| of God by Zacharias, or the perfect passive participle \eulogmenos\ as in strkjv@Luke:1:42| of Mary by Elizabeth and in strkjv@Matthew:21:9|. Both forms come from \euloge\, to speak well of (\eu, logos\). The Greek word here (\makarioi\) is an adjective that means "happy" which in English etymology goes back to hap, chance, good-luck as seen in our words haply, hapless, happily, happiness. "Blessedness is, of course, an infinitely higher and better thing than mere happiness" (Weymouth). English has thus ennobled "blessed" to a higher rank than "happy." But "happy" is what Jesus said and the _Braid Scots New Testament_ dares to say "Happy" each time here as does the _Improved Edition of the American Bible Union Version_. The Greek word is as old as Homer and Pindar and was used of the Greek gods and also of men, but largely of outward prosperity. Then it is applied to the dead who died in the Lord as in strkjv@Revelation:14:13|. Already in the Old Testament the Septuagint uses it of moral quality. "Shaking itself loose from all thoughts of outward good, it becomes the express symbol of a happiness identified with pure character. Behind it lies the clear cognition of sin as the fountain-head of all misery, and of holiness as the final and effectual cure for every woe. For knowledge as the basis of virtue, and therefore of happiness, it substitutes faith and love" (Vincent). Jesus takes this word "happy" and puts it in this rich environment. "This is one of the words which have been transformed and ennobled by New Testament use; by association, as in the Beatitudes, with unusual conditions, accounted by the world miserable, or with rare and difficult" (Bruce). It is a pity that we have not kept the word "happy" to the high and holy plane where Jesus placed it. "If you know these things, happy (\makarioi\) are you if you do them" (John:13:17|). "Happy (\makarioi\) are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John:20:29|). And Paul applies this adjective to God, "according to the gospel of the glory of the happy (\makariou\) God" (1Timothy:1:11|. Cf. also strkjv@Titus:2:13|). The term "Beatitudes" (Latin _beatus_) comes close to the meaning of Christ here by \makarioi\. It will repay one to make a careful study of all the "beatitudes" in the New Testament where this word is employed. It occurs nine times here (3-11|), though the beatitudes in verses 10 and 11 are very much alike. The copula is not expressed in either of these nine beatitudes. In each case a reason is given for the beatitude, "for" (\hoti\), that shows the spiritual quality involved. Some of the phrases employed by Jesus here occur in the Psalms, some even in the Talmud (itself later than the New Testament, though of separate origin). That is of small moment. "The originality of Jesus lies in putting the due value on these thoughts, collecting them, and making them as prominent as the Ten Commandments. No greater service can be rendered to mankind than to rescue from obscurity neglected moral commonplaces " (Bruce). Jesus repeated his sayings many times as all great teachers and preachers do, but this sermon has unity, progress, and consummation. It does not contain all that Jesus taught by any means, but it stands out as the greatest single sermon of all time, in its penetration, pungency, and power. {The poor in spirit} (\hoi ptchoi ti pneumati\). Luke has only "the poor," but he means the same by it as this form in Matthew, "the pious in Israel, for the most part poor, whom the worldly rich despised and persecuted" (McNeile). The word used here (\ptchoi\) is applied to the beggar Lazarus in strkjv@Luke:16:20,22| and suggests spiritual destitution (from \ptss\ to crouch, to cower). The other word \pens\ is from \penomai\, to work for one's daily bread and so means one who works for his living. The word \ptchos\ is more frequent in the New Testament and implies deeper poverty than \pens\. "The kingdom of heaven" here means the reign of God in the heart and life. This is the _summum bonum_ and is what matters most.
rwp@Matthew:6:24 @{No man can serve two masters} (\oudeis dunatai dusi kuriois douleuein\). Many try it, but failure awaits them all. Men even try "to be slaves to God and mammon" (\Thei douleuein kai mamni\). Mammon is a Chaldee, Syriac, and Punic word like _Plutus_ for the money-god (or devil). The slave of mammon will obey mammon while pretending to obey God. The United States has had a terrible revelation of the power of the money-god in public life in the Sinclair-Fall-Teapot-Air-Dome-Oil case. When the guide is blind and leads the blind, both fall into the ditch. The man who cannot tell road from ditch sees falsely as Ruskin shows in _Modern Painters_. He will hold to one (\henos anthexetai\). The word means to line up face to face (\anti\) with one man and so against the other.
rwp@Matthew:9:9 @{At the place of toll} (\epi to telnion\). The tax-office or custom-house of Capernaum placed here to collect taxes from the boats going across the lake outside of Herod's territory or from people going from Damascus to the coast, a regular caravan route. "{Called Matthew}" (\Maththaion legomenon\) and in strkjv@10:3| Matthew the publican is named as one of the Twelve Apostles. Mark (Mark:2:14|) and Luke (Luke:5:27|) call this man Levi. He had two names as was common, Matthew Levi. The publicans (\telnai\) get their name in English from the Latin _publicanus_ (a man who did public duty), not a very accurate designation. They were detested because they practised graft. Even Gabinius the proconsul of Syria was accused by Cicero of relieving Syrians and Jews of legitimate taxes for graft. He ordered some of the tax-officers removed. Already Jesus had spoken of the publican (5:46|) in a way that shows the public disfavour in which they were held.
rwp@Matthew:16:19 @{The Keys of the kingdom} (\tas kleidas ts basileias\). Here again we have the figure of a building with keys to open from the outside. The question is raised at once if Jesus does not here mean the same thing by "kingdom" that he did by "church" in verse 18|. In strkjv@Revelation:1:18; strkjv@3:7| Christ the Risen Lord has "the keys of death and of Hades." He has also "the keys of the kingdom of heaven" which he here hands over to Peter as "gatekeeper" or "steward" (\oikonomos\) provided we do not understand it as a special and peculiar prerogative belonging to Peter. The same power here given to Peter belongs to every disciple of Jesus in all the ages. Advocates of papal supremacy insist on the primacy of Peter here and the power of Peter to pass on this supposed sovereignty to others. But this is all quite beside the mark. We shall soon see the disciples actually disputing again (Matthew:18:1|) as to which of them is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven as they will again (20:21|) and even on the night before Christ's death. Clearly neither Peter nor the rest understood Jesus to say here that Peter was to have supreme authority. What is added shows that Peter held the keys precisely as every preacher and teacher does. To "bind" (\dsis\) in rabbinical language is to forbid, to "loose" (\lusis\) is to permit. Peter would be like a rabbi who passes on many points. Rabbis of the school of Hillel "loosed" many things that the school of Schammai "bound." The teaching of Jesus is the standard for Peter and for all preachers of Christ. Note the future perfect indicative (\estai dedemenon, estai lelumenon\), a state of completion. All this assumes, of course, that Peter's use of the keys will be in accord with the teaching and mind of Christ. The binding and loosing is repeated by Jesus to all the disciples (18:18|). Later after the Resurrection Christ will use this same language to all the disciples (John:20:23|), showing that it was not a special prerogative of Peter. He is simply first among equals, _primus inter pares_, because on this occasion he was spokesman for the faith of all. It is a violent leap in logic to claim power to forgive sins, to pronounce absolution, by reason of the technical rabbinical language that Jesus employed about binding and loosing. Every preacher uses the keys of the kingdom when he proclaims the terms of salvation in Christ. The proclamation of these terms when accepted by faith in Christ has the sanction and approval of God the Father. The more personal we make these great words the nearer we come to the mind of Christ. The more ecclesiastical we make them the further we drift away from him.
rwp@Matthew:23:17 @{Ye fools} (\mroi\). In strkjv@5:22| Jesus had warned against calling a man \mros\ in a rage, but here he so terms the blind Pharisees for their stupidity, description of the class. "It shows that not the word but the spirit in which it is uttered is what matters" (McNeile).
rwp@Matthew:26:50 @{Do that for which thou art come} (\eph' ho parei\). Moffatt and Goodspeed take it: "Do your errand." There has been a deal of trouble over this phrase. Deissmann (_Light from the Ancient East_, pp. 125 to 131) has proven conclusively that it is a question, \eph' ho\ in late Greek having the interrogative sense of \epi ti\ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 725). The use of \eph' ho\ for "why here" occurs on a Syrian tablet of the first century A.D. 50 that it "was current coin in the language of the people" (Deissmann). Most of the early translations (Old Latin, Old Syriac) took it as a question. Songs:the Vulgate has _ad quid venisti_. In this instance the Authorized Version is correct against the Revised. Jesus exposes the pretence of Judas and shows that he does not believe in his paraded affection (Bruce).
rwp@Matthew:26:53 @{Even now} (\arti\). Just now, at this very moment. {Legions} (\leginas\). A Latin word. Roman soldiers in large numbers were in Palestine later in A.D. 66, but they were in Caesarea and in the tower of Antonia in Jerusalem. A full Roman legion had 6,100 foot and 726 horse in the time of Augustus. But Jesus sees more than twelve legions at his command (one for each apostle) and shows his undaunted courage in this crisis. One should recall the story of Elisha at Dothan (2Kings:6:17|).
rwp@Matthew:27:4 @{See thou to it} (\su opsi\). Judas made a belated confession of his sin in betraying innocent blood to the Sanhedrin, but not to God, nor to Jesus. The Sanhedrin ignore the innocent or righteous blood (\haima athion\ or \dikaion\) and tell Judas to look after his own guilt himself. They ignore also their own guilt in the matter. The use of \su opsi\ as a volitive future, an equivalent of the imperative, is commoner in Latin (_tu videris_) than in Greek, though the _Koin_ shows it also. The sentiment is that of Cain (Grotius, Bruce).
rwp@Philemon:1:16 @{No longer as a servant} (\ouketi hs doulon\). "No longer as a slave." Songs:it has to be here. Songs:it should be always. Paul sends Onesimus, the converted runaway slave, back to his legal master, but shows that he expects Philemon the Christian to treat Onesimus as a brother in Christ, not as a slave. {But more than a servant} (\all' huper doulon\). "But beyond a slave." {A brother beloved} (\adelphon agapton\). A brother in Christ. {How much rather to thee} (\posi de mllon soi\). "By how much more to thee," because of Philemon's legal ownership of this now Christian slave. "In the flesh Philemon had the brother for a slave; in the Lord he had the slave for a brother" (Meyer).
rwp@Revelation:1:13 @{One like unto a son of man} (\homoion huion anthrpou\). Note accusative here with \homoion\ (object of \eidon\) as in strkjv@14:14| and not the associative-instrumental as is usual (1:15; strkjv@4:3,6|). Charles holds that \homoion\ here has the sense of \hs\ (as) and compares strkjv@4:6; strkjv@22:1| for proof. The absence of the article here shows also (Charles) that the idea is not "like the Son of man" for Christ is the Son of man. He is like "a son of man," but not a man. {Clothed} (\endedumenon\). Perfect passive participle of \endu\, accusative case agreeing with \homoion\. {A garment down to the foot} (\podr\). Old adjective \podrs\ (from \pous\, foot, and \air\), here only in N.T., accusative singular retained with the passive participle as often with verbs of clothing. Supply \chitna\ or \esthta\ (garment). {Girt about} (\periezsmenon\). Perfect passive participle of \periznnumi\, accusative singular agreeing with \homoion\. {At the breasts} (\pros tois mastois\). Old word for breasts of a woman (Luke:11:27; strkjv@23:29|) and nipples of a man, as here. High girding like this was a mark of dignity as of the high priest (Josephus, _Ant_. III. 7. 2). For \pros\ with the locative see strkjv@Mark:5:11|. {With a golden girdle} (\znn chrusn\). Accusative case again retained with the passive participle (verb of clothing). Note also \chrusn\ (vernacular _Koin_) rather than the old form, \chrusn\.
rwp@Revelation:1:15 @{Burnished brass} (\chalkolibani\). Associative-instrumental case after \homoioi\. This word has so far been found nowhere else save here and strkjv@2:18|. Suidas defines it as an \lecktron\ (amber) or a compound of copper and gold and silver (_aurichalcum_ in the Latin Vulgate). It is in reality an unknown metal. {As if it had been refined} (\hs pepuromens\). Perfect passive participle of \puro\, old verb, to set on fire, to glow, as in strkjv@Ephesians:6:16; strkjv@Revelation:3:18|. The feminine gender shows that \h chalkolibanos\ is referred to with \ts chalkolibanou\ understood, for it does not agree in case with the associative-instrumental \chalkolibani\ just before. Some would call it a slip for \pepuromeni\ as Aleph, and some cursives have it (taking \chalkolibani\ to be neuter, not feminine). But P Q read \pepurmenoi\ (masculine plural), a correction, making it agree in number and gender with \podes\ (feet). {In a furnace} (\en kamini\). Old word, in N.T. also strkjv@9:2; strkjv@Matthew:13:42,50|. {As the voice of many waters} (\hs phn hudatn polln\). Songs:the voice of God in the Hebrew (not the LXX) of strkjv@Ezekiel:43:2|. Repeated in strkjv@14:2; strkjv@19:6|.
rwp@Revelation:2:15 @{Songs:thou also} (\houts kai su\). Thou and the church at Pergamum as Israel had the wiles of Balaam. {The teaching of the Nicolaitans likewise} (\tn didachn tn Nikolaitn homois\). See on ¯1:6| for the Nicolaitans. The use of \homois\ (likewise) here shows that they followed Balaam in not obeying the decision of the Conference at Jerusalem (Acts:15:20,29|) about idolatry and fornication, with the result that they encouraged a return to pagan laxity of morals (Swete). Some wrongly hold that these Nicolaitans were Pauline Christians in the face of strkjv@Colossians:3:5-8; strkjv@Ephesians:5:3-6|.
rwp@Revelation:4:7 @{Like a lion} (\homoion leonti\). Associative-instrumental case again. In Ezekiel:(1:6,10|) each \zon\ has four faces, but here each has a different face. "The four forms represent whatever is noblest, strongest, wisest, and swiftest in nature" (Swete). But it is not necessary to try to find a symbolism in each face here like the early baseless identification with the Four Evangelists (the lion for Mark, the man for Matthew, the calf for Luke, the eagle for John). \Moschos\ is first a sprout, then the young of animals, then a calf (bullock or heifer) as in strkjv@Luke:15:23, 27,30|, or a full-grown ox (Ezekiel:1:10|). {Had} (\echn\). Masculine singular (some MSS. \echon\ neuter singular agreeing with \zon\) present active participle of \ech\, changing the construction with the \triton zon\ almost like a finite verb as in verse 8|. {A face as of a man} (\prospon hs anthrpou\). Shows that the likeness in each instance extended only to the face. {Like an eagle flying} (\homoion aeti petomeni\). Present middle participle of \petomai\, to fly, old verb, in N.T. only in strkjv@Revelation:4:7; strkjv@8:13; strkjv@12:14; strkjv@14:6; strkjv@19:17|. The \aetos\ in strkjv@Matthew:24:28; strkjv@Luke:17:37| may be a form of vulture going after carrion, but not in strkjv@Revelation:8:13; strkjv@12:14|.
rwp@Revelation:9:6 @{Men} (\hoi anthrpoi\). Generic use of the article (men as a class). {Shall not find it} (\ou m heursousin auton\). Strong double negative \ou m\ with the future active indicative according to Aleph Q, but \heursin\ (second aorist active subjunctive) according to A P (either construction regular). The idea here is found in strkjv@Job:3:21; strkjv@Jeremiah:8:3|. "Such a death as they desire, a death which will end their sufferings, is impossible; physical death is no remedy for the \basanismos\ of an evil conscience" (Swete). {They shall desire to die} (\epithumsousin apothanein\). Future active of \epithume\, a climax to \ztsousin\ (they shall seek), to desire vehemently. Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:1:23| shows a preference for death if his work is done, in order to be with Christ, a very different feeling from what we have here. {Fleeth} (\pheugei\). Vivid futuristic present active indicative of \pheug\. Even death does not come to their relief.
rwp@Revelation:9:20 @{Repented not} (\ou metenosan\). First aorist active indicative of \metanoe\. The two-thirds of mankind still spared did not change their creed or their conduct. {Of the works} (\ek tn ergn\). For this use of \ek\ after \metanoe\ see strkjv@2:21; strkjv@9:21; strkjv@16:11|. By "works" (\ergn\) here idolatries are meant, as the next verse shows. {That they should not worship} (\hina m proskunsousin\). Negative purpose clause with \hina m\ and the future active of \proskune\ as in strkjv@9:5|. {Devils} (\ta daimonia\). Both in the O.T. (Deuteronomy:32:17; strkjv@Psalms:96:5; strkjv@106:37|) and in the N.T. (1Corinthians:10:21|) the worship of idols is called the worship of unclean spirits. Perhaps this is one explanation of the hideous faces given these images. "The idols" (\ta eidla\ strkjv@1John:5:21|, from \eidos\, form, appearance) represented "demons," whether made of gold (\ta chrus\) or of silver (\ta argur\) or of brass (\ta chalk\) or of stone (\ta lithina\) or of wood (\ta xulina\). See strkjv@Daniel:5:23| for this picture of heathen idols. The helplessness of these idols, "which can neither see nor hear nor walk" (\ha oute blepein dunantai oute akouein oute peripatein\), is often presented in the O.T. (Psalms:113:12ff.; strkjv@115:4|).
rwp@Revelation:11:15 @{There followed} (\egenonto\). "There came to pass." There was silence in heaven upon the opening of the seventh seal (8:1|), but here "great voices." Perhaps the great voices are the \za\ of strkjv@4:6ff.; strkjv@5:8|. {Saying} (\legontes\). Construction according to sense; \legontes\, masculine participle (not \legousai\), though \phnai\, feminine. John understood what was said. {Is become} (\egeneto\). "Did become," prophetic use of the aorist participle, already a fact. See \egeneto\ in strkjv@Luke:19:9|. {The kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ} (\tou kuriou hmn kai tou Christou autou\). Repeat \h basileia\ from the preceding. God the Father is meant here by \kuriou\ (Lord), as \autou\ (his) shows. This is the certain and glorious outcome of the age-long struggle against Satan, who wields the kingdom of the world which he offered to Christ on the mountain for one act of worship. But Jesus scorned partnership with Satan in the rule of the world, and chose war, war up to the hilt and to the end. Now the climax has come with Christ as Conqueror of the kingdom of this world for his Father. This is the crowning lesson of the Apocalypse. {He shall reign} (\basileusei\). Future active of \basileu\. God shall reign, but the rule of God and of Christ is one as the kingdom is one (1Corinthians:15:27|). Jesus is the Lord's Anointed (Luke:2:26; strkjv@9:20|).
rwp@Revelation:12:10 @{A great voice saying} (\phnn megaln legousan\). Accusative after \kousa\ in this phrase as in strkjv@5:11; strkjv@10:4; strkjv@14:2; strkjv@18:4|, but the genitive \phns legouss\ in strkjv@11:12; strkjv@14:13|. We are not told whence this voice or song comes, possibly from one of the twenty-four elders (Swete) or some other heavenly beings (11:15|) who can sympathize with human beings (19:10|), the martyrs in heaven (Charles). {Now is come} (\arti egeneto\). \Arti\ (John:13:33|) shows how recent the downfall of Satan here proleptically pictured as behind us in time (aorist tense \egeneto\). {The salvation} (\h stria\). Here "the victory" as in strkjv@7:10; strkjv@19:1|. {The power} (\h dunamis\). Gods power over the dragon (cf. strkjv@7:12; strkjv@11:17; strkjv@19:1|). {The kingdom} (\h basileia\). "The empire of God" as in strkjv@11:15|. {The authority of his Christ} (\h exousia tou Christou autou\). Which Christ received from the Father (Matthew:28:18; strkjv@John:17:2|). See strkjv@11:15| (Psalms:2:2|) for "his Anointed." {The accuser} (\ho katgr\). The regular form, \katgoros\, occurs in strkjv@John:8:10; strkjv@Acts:23:30,35; strkjv@25:16,18| and in many MSS. here in strkjv@Revelation:12:10|, but A reads \katgr\, which Westcott and Hort accept. It was once considered a Greek transliteration of a Hebrew word, but Deissmann (_Light_, etc., p. 93f.) quotes it from a vernacular magical papyrus of the fourth century A.D. with no sign of Jewish or Christian influence, just as \diakn\ appears as a vernacular form of \diakonos\. Only here is the word applied to Satan in the N.T. In late Judaism Satan is the accuser, and Michael the defender, of the faithful. {Of our brethren} (\tn adelphn hmn\). The saints still on earth battling with Satan and his devices. {Which accuseth them} (\ho katgorn autous\). Articular present active participle of \katgore\, old verb, to accuse, usually with the genitive of the person (John:5:45|), but here with the accusative. This is the devil's constant occupation (Job:1:6f.|). {Day and night} (\hmeras kai nuktos\). Genitive of time. "By day and by night."
rwp@Revelation:13:16 @{He causeth all} (same use of \poie\ as in 12,15|). Note article here with each class (the small and the great, etc.). {That there be given them} (\hina dsin autois\). Same use of \hina\ after \poie\ as in 12,15|, only here with indefinite plural \dsin\ (second aorist active subjunctive), "that they give themselves," as in strkjv@10:11; strkjv@12:6; strkjv@16:15|. {A mark} (\charagma\). Old word from \charass\, to engrave, in strkjv@Acts:17:29| of idolatrous images, but in Rev. (Revelation:13:16,17; strkjv@14:9,11; strkjv@16:2; strkjv@19:20; strkjv@20:4|) of the brand of the beast on the right hand or on the forehead or on both. Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, pp. 240ff.) shows that in the papyri official business documents often have the name and image of the emperor, with the date as the official stamp or seal and with \charagma\ as the name of this seal. Animals and slaves were often branded with the owner's name, as Paul (Galatians:6:17|) bore the stigmata of Christ. Ptolemy Philadelphus compelled some Alexandrian Jews to receive the mark of Dionysus as his devotees (III Macc. strkjv@3:29). The servants of God receive on their foreheads the stamp of the divine seal (Revelation:7:3|). Charles is certain that John gets his metaphor from the \tephillin\ (phylacteries) which the Jew wore on his left hand and on his forehead. At any rate, this "mark of the beast" was necessary for life and all social and business relations. On the right hand, that is in plain sight. {Upon their forehead} (\epi to metpon autn\). Accusative with \epi\, though genitive just before with \cheiros\ (hand). See already strkjv@7:3; strkjv@9:4| (genitive \epi tn metpn\). Only in the Apocalypse in N.T.
rwp@Revelation:16:1 @{A great voice} (\megals phns\). Not an angel as in strkjv@5:2; strkjv@7:2; strkjv@10:3; strkjv@14:7,9,15,18|, but of God as strkjv@15:8| shows, since no one could enter the \naos\. {Pour out} (\ekcheete\). Second aorist active imperative of \ekche\ (same form as present active imperative). Blass would change to \ekcheate\ (clearly aorist) as in verse 6|. {The seven bowls} (\tas hepta phialas\). The article points to verse 7|.
rwp@Revelation:19:10 @{To worship him} (\proskunsai auti\). First aorist active infinitive of purpose. John either felt that the angel represented God or he was beside himself with excitement over the glorious consummation. He was tempted to worship an angel (Colossians:2:18|). {See thou do it not} (\hora m\). Repeated in strkjv@22:9|. Here there is no verb after \m\ (ellipse of \poisis touto\) as in strkjv@Mark:1:44; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:15|), the aorist subjunctive of negative purpose with \m\ after \hora\ (present active imperative of \hora\), a common enough idiom. {Fellow-servant} (\sundoulos\). The angel refuses worship from John on this ground. All Christians are \sundouloi\ (fellow-servants) as Christ taught (Matthew:18:28ff.; strkjv@24:49|) and as Paul (Colossians:1:7; strkjv@4:7|) and John (Revelation:6:11|) taught. Angels are God's servants also (Hebrews:1:4-14|). For "the testimony of Jesus see strkjv@1:2,9; strkjv@6:9; strkjv@12:17; strkjv@22:4|. {Worship God} (\ti thei proskunson\). And Christ, who is the Son of God (5:13f.|). {The spirit of prophecy} (\to pneuma ts prophteias\). Explanatory use of \gar\ (for) here as in 8|. The possession of the prophetic spirit shows itself in witness to Jesus. In illustration see strkjv@Mark:1:10; strkjv@Matthew:3:16; strkjv@Luke:3:21; strkjv@John:1:51; strkjv@Revelation:4:1; strkjv@10:1; strkjv@11:19; strkjv@14:17; strkjv@15:5; strkjv@18:1; strkjv@19:1,7-9|.
rwp@Romans:1:7 @{In Rome} (\en Rmi\). One late uncial (G of tenth century) and a cursive omit these words here and one or two other late MSS. omit \en Rmi\ in verse 15|. This possibly proves the Epistle was circulated as a circular to a limited extent, but the evidence is late and slight and by no means shows that this was the case in the first century. It is not comparable with the absence of \en Ephesi\ in strkjv@Ephesians:1:1| from Aleph and B (the two oldest and best MSS.). {Beloved of God} (\agaptois theou\). Ablative case of \theou\ after the verbal adjective like \didaktoi theou\ (taught of God) in strkjv@John:6:45| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516). {From God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ} (\apo theou patros hmn kai kuriou Isou Christou\). "St. Paul, if not formally enunciating a doctrine of the Divinity of Christ, held a view which cannot really be distinguished from it" (Sanday and Headlam). Paul's theology is clearly seen in the terms used in verses 1-7|.
rwp@Romans:1:22 @{Professing themselves to be wise} (\phaskontes einai sophoi\). \Sophoi\ is predicate nominative with \einai\ in indirect discourse agreeing with \phaskontes\ (old verb, from \phmi\, to say, rare in N.T.) in case and number according to regular Greek idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1038). {Became vain} (\emataithsan\). Ingressive first aorist passive indicative of \mataio\ from \mataios\ (empty). Empty reasonings as often today. {Became fools} (\emranthsan\). Ingressive first aorist passive of \mrain\, to be a fool, old word from \mros\, a fool. An oxymoron or sharp saying, true and one that cuts to the bone. {For the likeness of an image} (\en homoimati eikonos\). Both words, "a likeness which consists in an image or copy" (Lightfoot). See strkjv@Phillipians:2:7| for "likeness of men" and strkjv@Colossians:1:15| for "image of God." Paul shows indignant contempt for these grotesque efforts to present pictures of a deity that had been lost (Denney). Why is it that heathen images of gods in the form of men and beasts are so horrible to look upon?
rwp@Romans:5:7 @{Scarcely} (\molis\). Common adverb from \molos\, toil. See on strkjv@Acts:14:18|. As between \dikaios\, righteous, and \agathos\, good, Lightfoot notes "all the difference in the world" which he shows by quotations from Plato and Christian writers, a difference of sympathy mainly, the \dikaios\ man being "absolutely without sympathy" while the \agathos\ man "is beneficent and kind." {Would even dare} (\kai tolmi\). Present active indicative of \tolma\, to have courage. "Even dares to." Even so in the case of the kindly sympathetic man courage is called for to make the supreme sacrifice. {Perhaps} (\tacha\). Common adverb (perhaps instrumental case) from \tachus\ (swift). Only here in N.T.
rwp@Romans:5:14 @{Even over them that had not sinned after the likeness of Adam's transgression} (\kai epi tous m hamartsantas epi ti homoimati ts parabases Adam\). Adam violated an express command of God and Moses gave the law of God clearly. And yet sin and death followed all from Adam on till Moses, showing clearly that the sin of Adam brought terrible consequences upon the race. Death has come upon infants and idiots also as a result of sin, but one understands Paul to mean that they are not held responsible by the law of conscience. {A figure} (\tupos\). See on ¯Acts:7:43; strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:7; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:9; strkjv@1Corinthians:10:6| for this word. Adam is a type of Christ in holding a relation to those affected by the headship in each case, but the parallel is not precise as Paul shows.
rwp@Romans:6:19 @{I speak after the manner of men} (\anthrpinon leg\). "I speak a human word." He begs pardon for using "slaving" in connection with righteousness. But it is a good word, especially for our times when self-assertiveness and personal liberty bulk so large in modern speech. See strkjv@3:5; strkjv@Galatians:3:15| where he uses \kata anthrpon\. {Because of the infirmity of your flesh} (\dia tn astheneian ts sarkos humn\). Because of defective spiritual insight largely due to moral defects also. {Servants to uncleanness} (\doula ti akatharsii\). Neuter plural form of \doulos\ to agree with \mel\ (members). Patently true in sexual sins, in drunkenness, and all fleshly sins, absolutely slaves like narcotic fiends. {Songs:now} (\houts nun\). Now that you are born again in Christ. Paul uses twice again the same verb \paristmi\, to present (\parestsate, parastsate\). {Servants to righteousness} (\doula ti dikaiosuni\). Repeats the idea of verse 18|. {Unto sanctification} (\eis hagiasmon\). This the goal, the blessed consummation that demands and deserves the new slavery without occasional lapses or sprees (verse 15|). This late word appears only in LXX, N.T., and ecclesiastical writers so far. See on strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:3; strkjv@1Corinthians:1:30|. Paul includes sanctification in his conception of the God-kind (1:17|) of righteousness (both justification, strkjv@1:18-5:21| and sanctification, chapters 6-8|). It is a life process of consecration, not an instantaneous act. Paul shows that we ought to be sanctified (6:1-7:6|) and illustrates the obligation by death (6:1-14|), by slavery (6:15-23|), and by marriage (7:1-6|).
rwp@Romans:7:18 @{In me} (\en emoi\). Paul explains this by "in my flesh" (\en ti sarki mou\), the unregenerate man "sold under sin" of verse 14|. {No good thing} (\ouk--agathon\). "Not absolutely good." This is not a complete view of man even in his unregenerate state as Paul at once shows. {For to will is present with me} (\to gar thelein parakeitai moi\). Present middle indicative of \parakeimai\, old verb, to lie beside, at hand, with dative \moi\. Only here in N.T. {The wishing} is the better self, {the doing not} the lower self.
rwp@Romans:9:6 @{But it is not as though} (\ouch hoion de hoti\). Supply \estin\ after \ouch\: "But it is not such as that," an old idiom, here alone in N.T. {Hath come to nought} (\ekpeptken\). Perfect active indicative of \ekpipt\, old verb, to fall out. {For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel} (\ou gar pantes hoi ex Isral houtoi Isral\). "For not all those out of Israel (the literal Jewish nation), these are Israel (the spiritual Israel)." This startling paradox is not a new idea with Paul. He had already shown (Galatians:3:7-9|) that those of faith are the true sons of Abraham. He has amplified that idea also in strkjv@Romans:4|. Songs:he is not making a clever dodge here to escape a difficulty. He now shows how this was the original purpose of God to include only those who believed. {Seed of Abraham} (\sperma Abraam\). Physical descent here, but spiritual seed by promise in verse 8|. He quotes strkjv@Genesis:21:12f|.
rwp@Romans:10:19 @{Did Israel not know?} (\m Israel ouk egn?\). "Did Israel fail to know?" See above. {First} (\prtos\). Moses first before any one else. LXX quotation strkjv@Deuteronomy:32:21|. See on ¯1Corinthians:10:22| for \parazls\ (I will provoke you to jealousy). {With that which is no nation} (\ep' ouk ethnei\). The Jews had worshipped "no-gods" and now God shows favours to a "no-nation" (people). {Will I anger you} (\parorgi humas\). Future active (Attic future) of \parorgiz\, rare word, to rouse to wrath.
rwp@Romans:11:17 @{Branches} (\kladn\). From \kla\, to break. {Were broken off} (\exeklasthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \ekkla\. Play on the word \klados\ (branch) and \ekkla\, to break off. Condition of first class, assumed as true. Some of the individual Jews (natural Israel) were broken off the stock of the tree (spiritual Israel). {And thou} (\kai su\). An individual Gentile. {Being a wild olive} (\agrielaios n\). This word, used by Aristotle, occurs in an inscription. Ramsay (_Pauline Studies_, pp. 219ff.) shows that the ancients used the wild-olive graft upon an old olive tree to reinvigorate the tree precisely as Paul uses the figure here and that both the olive tree and the graft were influenced by each other, though the wild olive graft did not produce as good olives as the original stock. But it should be noted that in verse 24| Paul expressly states that the grafting of Gentiles on to the stock of the spiritual Israel was "contrary to nature" (\para phusin\). {Wast grafted in} (\enekentrisths\). First aorist passive indicative of \enkentriz\, to cut in, to graft, used by Aristotle. Belongs "to the higher _Koin_" (literary _Koin_) according to Milligan. {Partaker} (\sunkoinnos\). Co-partner. {Fatness} (\piottos\). Old word from \pin\ (fat), only here in N.T. Note three genitives here "of the root of the fatness of the olive."
rwp@Romans:11:19 @{Thou wilt say then} (\ereis oun\). A presumptuous Gentile speaks. {That I might be grafted in} (\hina eg enkentristh\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist passive subjunctive. He shows contempt for the cast-off Jews.
rwp@Romans:14:7 @{To himself} (\heauti\). Dative of advantage again. But to the Lord as he shows in verse 8|. Life and death focus in the Lord.
rwp@Romans:15:26 @{For it hath been the good pleasure of Macedonia and Achaia} (\udoksan gar Makedonia kai Achaia\). "For Macedonia and Achaia took pleasure." The use of \udoksan\ (first aorist active indicative of \eudoke\) shows that it was voluntary (2Corinthians:8:4|). Paul does not here mention Asia and Galatia. {A certain contribution} (\koinnian tina\). Put thus because it was unknown to the Romans. For this sense of \koinnian\, see strkjv@2Corinthians:8:4; strkjv@9:13|. {For the poor among the saints} (\eis tous ptchous tn hagin\). Partitive genitive. Not all there were poor, but strkjv@Acts:4:32-5:11; strkjv@6:1-6; strkjv@11:29f.; strkjv@Galatians:2:10| prove that many were.
rwp@Titus:2:7 @{Shewing thyself} (\seauton parechomenos\). Present middle (redundant middle) participle of \parech\ with the reflexive pronoun \seauton\ as if the active voice \parechn\. The _Koin_ shows an increasing number of such constructions (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 811). See active in strkjv@1Timothy:1:4|. {An ensample} (\tupon\). For this word see strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:9; strkjv@Phillipians:3:17|. {Uncorruptness} (\aphthorian\). Only example, from late adjective \aphthoros\ (\a\ privative and \phtheir\).
rwp@Titus:2:10 @{Not purloining} (\m nosphizomenous\). Present middle participle of \nosphiz\, old verb (from \nosphi\, apart), in middle to set apart for oneself, to embezzle, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:5:2f|. {Fidelity} (\pistin\). See strkjv@Galatians:5:22; strkjv@1Timothy:5:12| for \pistis\ in the sense of faithfulness. Nowhere else in the N.T. do we have \agath\ with \pistis\ as here, but an Oxyr. papyrus (iii. 494, 9) has this very phrase (\psan pistin endeiknumeni\). Westcott and Hort put \agapn\ in the margin. See strkjv@3:2|. {That they may adorn} (\hina kosmsin\). Final clause with \hina\ and present active subjunctive. See strkjv@1Timothy:2:9| for \kosme\. Paul shows slaves how they may "adorn" the teaching of God.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}