NT-EPISTLES.filter - rwp makes:
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:1:20 @{Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world?} (\Pou sophos; pou grammateus; pou sunztts tou ainos toutou;\). Paul makes use of strkjv@Isaiah:33:18| without exact quotation. The sudden retreat of Sennacherib with the annihilation of his officers. "On the tablet of Shalmaneser in the Assyrian Gallery of the British Museum there is a surprisingly exact picture of the scene described by Isaiah" (Robertson and Plummer). Note the absence of the Greek article in each of these rhetorical questions though the idea is clearly definite. Probably \sophos\ refers to the Greek philosopher, \grammateus\ to the Jewish scribe and \sunztts\ suits both the Greek and the Jewish disputant and doubter (Acts:6:9; strkjv@9:29; strkjv@17:18; strkjv@28:29|). There is a note of triumph in these questions. The word \sunztts\ occurs here alone in the N.T. and elsewhere only in Ignatius, Eph. 18 quoting this passage, but the papyri give the verb \sunzte\ for disputing (questioning together). {Hath not God made foolish?} (\ouchi emranen ho theos;\). Strong negative form with aorist active indicative difficult of precise translation, "Did not God make foolish?" The old verb \mrain\ from \mros\, foolish, was to be foolish, to act foolish, then to prove one foolish as here or to make foolish as in strkjv@Romans:1:22|. In strkjv@Matthew:5:13; strkjv@Luke:14:34| it is used of salt that is tasteless. {World} (\kosmou\). Synonymous with \ain\ (age), orderly arrangement, then the non-Christian cosmos.
rwp@1Corinthians:1:26 @{Behold} (\blepete\). Same form for imperative present active plural and indicative. Either makes sense as in strkjv@John:5:39| \eraunate\ and strkjv@14:1| \pisteuete\. {Calling} (\klsin\). The act of calling by God, based not on the external condition of those called (\kltoi\, verse 2|), but on God's sovereign love. It is a clinching illustration of Paul's argument, an _argumentum ad hominen_. {How that} (\hoti\). Explanatory apposition to \klsin\. {After the flesh} (\kata sarka\). According to the standards of the flesh and to be used not only with \sophoi\ (wise, philosophers), but also \dunatoi\ (men of dignity and power), \eugeneis\ (noble, high birth), the three claims to aristocracy (culture, power, birth). {Are called}. Not in the Greek, but probably to be supplied from the idea in \klsin\.
rwp@1Corinthians:2:13 @{Which things also we speak} (\ha kai laloumen\). This onomatopoetic verb \lale\ (from \la-la\), to utter sounds. In the papyri the word calls more attention to the form of utterance while \leg\ refers more to the substance. But \lale\ in the N.T. as here is used of the highest and holiest speech. Undoubtedly Paul employs the word purposely for the utterance of the revelation which he has understood. That is to say, there is revelation (verse 10|), illumination (verse 12|), and inspiration (verse 13|). Paul claims therefore the help of the Holy Spirit for the reception of the revelation, for the understanding of it, for the expression of it. Paul claimed this authority for his preaching (1Thessalonians:4:2|) and for his epistles (2Thessalonians:3:14|). {Not in words which man's wisdom teacheth} (\ouk en didaktois anthrpins sophias logois\). Literally, "not in words taught by human wisdom." The verbal adjective \didaktois\ (from \didask\, to teach) is here passive in idea and is followed by the ablative case of origin or source as in strkjv@John:6:45|, \esontai pantes didaktoi theou\ (from strkjv@Isaiah:54:13|), "They shall all be taught by God." The ablative in Greek, as is well known, has the same form as the genitive, though quite different in idea (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 516). Songs:then Paul claims the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance (\laloumen\) of the words, "which the Spirit teacheth (\en didaktois pneumatos\), "in words taught by the Spirit" (ablative \pneumatos\ as above). Clearly Paul means that the help of the Holy Spirit in the utterance of the revelation extends to the words. No theory of inspiration is here stated, but it is not _mere_ human wisdom. Paul's own Epistles bear eloquent witness to the lofty claim here made. They remain today after nearly nineteen centuries throbbing with the power of the Spirit of God, dynamic with life for the problems of today as when Paul wrote them for the needs of the believers in his time, the greatest epistles of all time, surcharged with the energy of God. {Comparing spiritual things with spiritual} (\pneumatikois pneumatika sunkrinontes\). Each of these words is in dispute. The verb \sunkrin\, originally meant to combine, to join together fitly. In the LXX it means to interpret dreams (Genesis:40:8,22; strkjv@41:12|) possibly by comparison. In the later Greek it may mean to compare as in strkjv@2Corinthians:10:12|. In the papyri Moulton and Milligan (_Vocabulary_) give it only for "decide," probably after comparing. But "comparing," in spite of the translations, does not suit well here. Songs:it is best to follow the original meaning to combine as do Lightfoot and Ellicott. But what gender is \pneumatikois\? Is it masculine or neuter like \pneumatika\? If masculine, the idea would be "interpreting (like LXX) spiritual truths to spiritual persons" or "matching spiritual truths with spiritual persons." This is a possible rendering and makes good sense in harmony with verse 14|. If \pneumatikois\ be taken as neuter plural (associative instrumental case after \sun\ in \sunkrinontes\), the idea most naturally would be, "combining spiritual ideas (\pneumatika\) with spiritual words" (\pneumatikois\). This again makes good sense in harmony with the first part of verse 13|. On the whole this is the most natural way to take it, though various other possibilities exist.
rwp@1Corinthians:2:14 @{Now the natural man} (\psuchikos de anthrpos\). Note absence of article here, "A natural man" (an unregenerate man). Paul does not employ modern psychological terms and he exercises variety in his use of all the terms here present as \pneuma\ and \pneumatikos, psuch\ and \psuchikos, sarx\ and \sarkinos\ and \sarkikos\. A helpful discussion of the various uses of these words in the New Testament is given by Burton in his _New Testament Word Studies_, pp. 62-68, and in his {Spirit, Soul, and Flesh}. The papyri furnish so many examples of \sarx, pneuma\, and \psuch\ that Moulton and Milligan make no attempt at an exhaustive treatment, but give a few miscellaneous examples to illustrate the varied uses that parallel the New Testament. \Psuchikos\ is a qualitative adjective from \psuch\ (breath of life like \anima\, life, soul). Here the Vulgate renders it by _animalis_ and the German by _sinnlich_, the original sense of animal life as in strkjv@Jude:1:19; strkjv@James:3:15|. In strkjv@1Corinthians:15:44,46| there is the same contrast between \psuchikos\ and \pneumatikos\ as here. The \psuchikos\ man is the unregenerate man while the \pneumatikos\ man is the renewed man, born again of the Spirit of God. {Receiveth not} (\ou dechetai\). Does not accept, rejects, refuses to accept. In strkjv@Romans:8:7| Paul definitely states the inability (\oude gar dunatai\) of the mind of the flesh to receive the things of the Spirit untouched by the Holy Spirit. Certainly the initiative comes from God whose Holy Spirit makes it possible for us to accept the things of the Spirit of God. They are no longer "foolishness" (\mria\) to us as was once the case (1:23|). Today one notes certain of the _intelligentsia_ who sneer at Christ and Christianity in their own blinded ignorance. {He cannot know them} (\ou dunatai gnnai\). He is not able to get a knowledge (ingressive second aorist active infinitive of \ginsk\). His helpless condition calls for pity in place of impatience on our part, though such an one usually poses as a paragon of wisdom and commiserates the deluded followers of Christ. {They are spiritually judged} (\pneumatiks anakrinetai\). Paul and Luke are fond of this verb, though nowhere else in the N.T. Paul uses it only in I Corinthians. The word means a sifting process to get at the truth by investigation as of a judge. In strkjv@Acts:17:11| the Beroeans scrutinized the Scriptures. These \psuchikoi\ men are incapable of rendering a decision for they are unable to recognize the facts. They judge by the \psuch\ (mere animal nature) rather than by the \pneuma\ (the renewed spirit).
rwp@1Corinthians:3:16 @{Ye are a temple of God} (\naos theou este\). Literally, a sanctuary (\naos\, not \hieron\, the sacred enclosure, but the holy place and the most holy place) of God. The same picture of building as in verse 9| (\oikodom\), only here the sanctuary itself. {Dwelleth in you} (\en humin oikei\). The Spirit of God makes his home (\oikei\) in us, not in temples made with hands (Acts:7:48; strkjv@17:24|).
rwp@1Corinthians:3:17 @{Destroyeth} (\phtheirei\). The outward temple is merely the symbol of God's presence, the Shechinah (the Glory). God makes his home in the hearts of his people or the church in any given place like Corinth. It is a terrible thing to tear down ruthlessly a church or temple of God like an earthquake that shatters a building in ruins. This old verb \phtheir\ means to corrupt, to deprave, to destroy. It is a gross sin to be a church-wrecker. There are actually a few preachers who leave behind them ruin like a tornado in their path. {Him shall God destroy} (\phtherei touton ho theos\). There is a solemn repetition of the same verb in the future active indicative. The condition is the first class and is assumed to be true. Then the punishment is certain and equally effective. The church-wrecker God will wreck. What does Paul mean by "will destroy"? Does he mean punishment here or hereafter? May it not be both? Certainly he does not mean annihilation of the man's soul, though it may well include eternal punishment. There is warning enough here to make every pastor pause before he tears a church to pieces in order to vindicate himself. {Holy} (\hagios\). Hence deserves reverential treatment. It is not the building or house of which Paul speaks as "the sanctuary of God" (\ton naon tou theou\), but the spiritual organization or organism of God's people in whom God dwells, "which temple ye are" (\hoitines este humeis\). The qualitative relative pronoun \hoitines\ is plural to agree with \humeis\ (ye) and refers to the holy temple just mentioned. The Corinthians themselves in their angry disputes had forgotten their holy heritage and calling, though this failing was no excuse for the ringleaders who had led them on. In strkjv@6:19| Paul reminds the Corinthians again that the body is the temple (\naos\, sanctuary) of the Holy Spirit, which fact they had forgotten in their immoralities.
rwp@1Corinthians:5:3 @{For I verily} (\eg men gar\). Emphatic statement of Paul's own attitude of indignation, \eg\ in contrast with \humeis\. He justifies his demand for the expulsion of the man. {Being absent} (\apn\) Although absent (concessive participle) and so of \parn\ though present. Each with locative case (\ti smati, ti pneumati\). {Have already judged} (\d kekrika\). Perfect active indicative of \krin\. I have already decided or judged, as though present (\hs parn\). Paul felt compelled to reach a conclusion about the case and in a sentence of much difficulty seems to conceive an imaginary church court where the culprit has been tried and condemned. There are various ways of punctuating the clauses in this sentence in verses 3-5|. It is not merely Paul's individual judgment. The genitive absolute clause in verse 4|, {ye being gathered together} (\sunachthentn humn\, first aorist passive participle of \sunag\, in regular assembly) {and my spirit} (\kai tou emou pneumatos\) with the assembly (he means) {and meeting in the name of our Lord Jesus} (\en ti onomati tou Kuriou [hmn] Isou\) with the power of the Lord Jesus (\sun ti dunamei tou Kuriou hmn Isou\), though this clause can be taken with the infinitive to deliver (\paradounai\). It makes good syntax and sense taken either way. The chief difference is that, if taken with "gathered together" (\sunachthentn\) Paul assumes less apostolic prerogative to himself. But he did have such power and used it against Elymas (Acts:13:8ff.|) as Peter did against Ananias and Sapphira (Acts:5:1ff.|).
rwp@1Corinthians:6:5 @{I say this to move you to shame} (\pros entropn humin leg\). Old word \entrop\ from \entrep\, to turn in (1Corinthians:4:14| which see). In N.T. only here and strkjv@15:34|. {One wise man} (\sophos\). From sarcasm to pathos Paul turns. {Does there not exist} (\eni\, short form for \enesti\)? With double negative \ouk--oudeis\, expecting the answer yes. Surely {one} such man exists in the church. {Who} (\hos\). Almost consecutive in idea, of such wisdom that he will be able. {To decide between his brethren} (\diakrinai ana meson tou adelphou autou\). \Krinai\ is to judge or decide (first aorist active infinitive of \krin\ and \dia\ (two) carries on the idea of between. Then \ana meson\ makes it still plainer, in the midst as {arbitrator} between brother and brother like \ana meson emou kai sou\ (Genesis:23:15|). It is even so a condensed expression with part of it unexpressed (\ana meson kai tou adelphou autou\) between brother and his brother. The use of \adelphos\ has a sharp reflection on them for their going to heathen judges to settle disputes between brothers in Christ.
rwp@1Corinthians:6:15 @{Members of Christ} (\mel Christou\). Old word for limbs, members. Even the Stoics held the body to be common with the animals (Epictetus, _Diss_. l. iii. 1) and only the reason like the gods. Without doubt some forms of modern evolution have contributed to the licentious views of animalistic sex indulgence, though the best teachers of biology show that in the higher animals monogamy is the rule. The body is not only adapted for Christ (verse 13|), but it is a part of Christ, in vital union with him. Paul will make much use of this figure further on (12:12-31; strkjv@Ephesians:4:11-16; strkjv@5:30|). {Shall I then take away?} (\aras oun;\). First aorist active participle of \air\, old verb to snatch, carry off like Latin _rapio_ (our rape). {Make} (\pois\). Can be either future active indicative or first aorist active subjunctive (deliberative). Either makes good sense. The horror of deliberately taking "members of Christ" and making them "members of a harlot" in an actual union staggers Paul and should stagger us. {God forbid} (\m genoito\). Optative second aorist in a negative wish for the future. {May it not happen!} The word "God" is not here. The idiom is common in Epictetus though rare in the LXX. Paul has it thirteen times and Luke once (Luke:20:16|).
rwp@1Corinthians:6:19 @{Your body is a temple} (\to sma humn naos estin\). A sanctuary as in strkjv@3:16| which see. Our spirits dwell in our bodies and the Holy Spirit dwells in our spirits. Some of the Gnostics split hairs between the sins of the body and fellowship with God in the spirit. Paul will have none of this subterfuge. One's body is the very shrine for the Holy Spirit. In Corinth was the temple to Aphrodite in which fornication was regarded as consecration instead of desecration. Prostitutes were there as priestesses of Aphrodite, to help men worship the goddess by fornication. {Ye are not your own} (\ouk este heautn\). Predicate genitive. Ye do not belong to yourselves, even if you could commit fornication without personal contamination or self-violation. Christianity makes unchastity dishonour in both sexes. There is no double standard of morality. Paul's plea here is primarily to men to be clean as members of Christ's body.
rwp@1Corinthians:7:11 @{But and if she depart} (\ean de kai christhi\). Third class condition, undetermined. If, in spite of Christ's clear prohibition, she get separated (ingressive passive subjunctive), {let her remain unmarried} (\menet agamos\). Paul here makes no allowance for remarriage of the innocent party as Jesus does by implication. {Or else be reconciled to her husband} (\ ti andri katallagt\). Second aorist (ingressive) passive imperative of \katallass\, old compound verb to exchange coins as of equal value, to reconcile. One of Paul's great words for reconciliation with God (2Corinthians:5:18-20; strkjv@Romans:5:10|). \Diallass\ (Matthew:5:24| which see) was more common in the older Greek, but \katallass\ in the later. The difference in idea is very slight, \dia-\ accents notion of exchange, \kat-\ the perfective idea (complete reconciliation). Dative of personal interest is the case of \andri\. This sentence is a parenthesis between the two infinitives \christhnai\ and \aphienai\ (both indirect commands after \paraggell\). {And that the husband leave not his wife} (\kai andra m aphienai\). This is also part of the Lord's command (Mark:10:11|). \Apolu\ occurs in Mark of the husband's act and \aphienai\ here, both meaning to send away. Bengel actually stresses the difference between \christhnai\ of the woman as like _separatur_ in Latin and calls the wife "pars ignobilior" and the husband "nobilior." I doubt if Paul would stand for that extreme.
rwp@1Corinthians:7:16 @{For how knowest thou?} (\ti gar oidas;\). But what does Paul mean? Is he giving an argument _against_ the believer accepting divorce or _in favour_ of doing so? The syntax allows either interpretation with \ei\ (if) after \oidas\. Is the idea in \ei\ (if) _hope_ of saving the other or _fear_ of not saving and hence peril in continuing the slavery of such a bondage? The latter idea probably suits the context best and is adopted by most commentators. And yet one hesitates to interpret Paul as _advocating_ divorce unless strongly insisted on by the unbeliever. There is no problem at all unless the unbeliever makes it. If it is a hopeless case, acquiescence is the only wise solution. But surely the believer ought to be sure that there is no hope before he agrees to break the bond. Paul raises the problem of the wife first as in verse 10|.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:28 @{But if any man say unto you} (\ean de tis humin eipi\). Condition of third class. Suppose at such a banquet a "weak" brother makes the point to you: "This hath been offered in sacrifice" (\touto hierothuton estin\). \Hierothuton\, late word in Plutarch, rare in inscriptions and papyri, only here in N.T. {Eat not} (\m esthiete\). Present imperative with \m\ prohibiting the habit of eating then. Pertinent illustration to the point of doing what is expedient and edifying. {That shewed it} (\ton mnusanta\). First aorist active articular participle (accusative case because of \dia\) from \mnu\, old verb, to point out, to disclose. See strkjv@Luke:20:37|.
rwp@1Corinthians:10:29 @{For why is my liberty judged by another conscience?} (\hina ti gar h eleutheria mou krinetai hupo alls suneidses;\). Supply \gentai\ (deliberative subjunctive) after \ti\. Paul deftly puts himself in the place of the strong brother at such a banquet who is expected to conform his conscience to that of the weak brother who makes the point about a particular piece of meat. It is an abridgment of one's personal liberty in the interest of the weak brother. Two individualities clash. The only reason is love which builds up (8:2| and all of chapter strkjv@1Corinthians:13|). There is this eternal collision between the forces of progress and reaction. If they work together, they must consider the welfare of each other.
rwp@1Corinthians:11:19 @{Must be} (\dei einai\). Since moral conditions are so bad among you (cf. chapters 1 to 6). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:18:7|. {Heresies} (\haireseis\). The schisms naturally become {factions} or {parties}. Cf. strifes (\erides\) in strkjv@1:11|. See on ¯Acts:15:5| for \haireseis\, a choosing, taking sides, holding views of one party, heresy (our word). "Heresy is theoretical schism, schism practical heresy." Cf. strkjv@Titus:3:10; strkjv@2Peter:2:1|. In Paul only here and strkjv@Galatians:5:20|. {That} (\hina\). God's purpose in these factions makes {the proved ones} (\hoi dokimoi\) become {manifest} (\phaneroi\). "These \haireseis\ are a magnet attracting unsound and unsettled minds" (Findlay). It has always been so. Instance so-called Christian Science, Russellism, New Thought, etc., today.
rwp@1Corinthians:11:25 @{After supper} (\meta to deipnsai\). \Meta\ and the articular aorist active infinitive, "after the dining" (or the supping) as in strkjv@Luke:22:20|. {The new covenant} (\h kain diathk\). For \diathk\ see on ¯Matthew:26:28|. For \kainos\ see on ¯Luke:5:38; strkjv@22:20|. The position of \estin\ before \en ti haimati\ (in my blood) makes it a secondary or additional predicate and not to be taken just with \diathk\ (covenant or will). {As oft as ye drink it} (\hosakis an pinte\). Usual construction for general temporal clause of repetition (\an\ and the present subjunctive with \hosakis\). Songs:in verse 26|.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:15 @{False witnesses of God} (\pseudomartures tou theou\). Late word, but \pseudomarture\, to bear false witness, old and common. The genitive (\tou theou\) can be either subjective (in God's service) or objective (concerning God). Either makes good sense. {Because we witnessed of God} (\hoti emartursamen kata tou theou\). Vulgate has _adversus Deum_. This is the more natural way to take \kata\ and genitive, {against God} not as equal to \peri\ (concerning). He would indeed make God play false in that case, {if so be that the dead are not raised} (\eiper ara nekroi ouk egeirontai\). Condition of first class, assumed as true. Note both \per\ intensive particle {indeed} and \ara\ inferential particle {therefore}.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:19 @{We have hoped} (\lpikotes esmen\). Periphrastic perfect active indicative. Hope limited to this life even if "in Christ." {Only} (\monon\) qualifies the whole clause. {Most pitiable} (\eleeinoteroi\). Comparative form, not superlative, of old adjective \eleeinos\, to be pitied, pitiable. If our hope is limited to this life, we have denied ourselves what people call pleasures and have no happiness beyond. The Epicureans have the argument on us. Paul makes morality turn on the hope of immortality. Is he not right? Witness the breaking of moral ties today when people take a merely animal view of life.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:27 @{He put} (\hupetaxen\). First aorist active of \hupotass\, to subject. Supply God (\theos\) as subject (Psalms:8:7|). See strkjv@Hebrews:2:5-9| for similar use. Cf. strkjv@Psalms:8|. {But when he saith} (\hotan de eipi\). Here Christ must be supplied as the subject if the reference is to his future and final triumph. The syntax more naturally calls for God as the subject as before. Either way makes sense. But there is no need to take \eipi\ (second aorist active subjunctive) as _a futurum exactum_, merely "whenever he shall say." {Are put in subjection} (\hupotetaktai\). Perfect passive indicative, state of completion, final triumph. {It is evident that} (\dlon hoti\). Supply \estin\ (is) before \hoti\. {He is excepted who did subject} (\ektos tou hupotaxantos\). "Except the one (God) who did subject (articular aorist active participle) the all things to him (Christ)."
rwp@1Corinthians:15:35 @{But some one will say} (\alla erei tis\). Paul knows what the sceptics were saying. He is a master at putting the standpoint of the imaginary adversary. {How} (\ps\). This is still the great objection to the resurrection of our bodies. Granted that Jesus rose from the dead, for the sake of argument, these sceptics refuse to believe in the possibility of our resurrection. It is the attitude of Matthew Arnold who said, "Miracles do not happen." Scientifically we know the "how" of few things. Paul has an astounding answer to this objection. Death itself is the way of resurrection as in the death of the seed for the new plant (verses 36f.|). {With what manner of body} (\poii smati\). This is the second question which makes plainer the difficulty of the first. The first body perishes. Will that body be raised? Paul treats this problem more at length (verses 38-54|) and by analogy of nature (Cf. Butler's famous _Analogy_). It is a spiritual, not a natural, body that is raised. \Sma\ here is an organism. {Flesh} (\sarx\) is the \sma\ for the natural man, but there is spiritual (\pneumatikon\) \sma\ for the resurrection.
rwp@1Corinthians:15:47 @{Earthly} (\chokos\). Late rare word, from \chous\, dust. {The second man from heaven} (\ho deuteros anthrpos ex ouranou\). Christ had a human (\psuchikon\) body, of course, but Paul makes the contrast between the first man in his natural body and the Second Man in his risen body. Paul saw Jesus after his resurrection and he appeared to him "from heaven." He will come again from heaven.
rwp@1Corinthians:16:17 @{At the coming} (\epi ti parousii\). At the coming here of Stephanas, etc., the very word used of the \parousia\ of Christ (15:23|). {That which was lacking on your part they supplied} (\to humeteron husterma houtoi aneplrsan\). Either "these filled up my lack of you" or "these filled up your lack of me." Either makes perfectly good sense and both were true. Which Paul meant we cannot tell.
rwp@1John:2:14 @{I have written} (\egrapsa\). Repeated three times. Epistolary aorist referring to this Epistle, not to a previous Epistle. Law (_Tests of Life_, p. 309) suggests that John was interrupted at the close of verse 13| and resumes here in verse 14| with a reference to what he had previously written in verse 13|. But that is needless ingenuity. It is quite in John's style to repeat himself with slight variations. {The Father} (\ton patera\). The heavenly Father as all of God's children should come to know him. He repeats from verse 13| what he said to "fathers." To the young men he adds \ischuroi\ (strong) and the word of God abiding in them. That is what makes them powerful (\ischuroi\) and able to gain the victory over the evil one.
rwp@1John:2:18 @{It is the last hour} (\eschat hra estin\). This phrase only here in N.T., though John often uses \hra\ for a crisis (John:2:4; strkjv@4:21,23; strkjv@5:25,28|, etc.). It is anarthrous here and marks the character of the "hour." John has seven times "the last day" in the Gospel. Certainly in verse 28| John makes it plain that the \parousia\ might come in the life of those then living, but it is not clear that here he definitely asserts it as a fact. It was his hope beyond a doubt. We are left in doubt about this "last hour" whether it covers a period, a series, or the final climax of all just at hand. {As ye heard} (\kaths kousate\). First aorist active indicative of \akou\. {Antichrist cometh} (\antichristos erchetai\). "Is coming." Present futuristic or prophetic middle indicative retained in indirect assertion. Songs:Jesus taught (Mark:13:6,22; strkjv@Matthew:24:5,15,24|) and so Paul taught (Acts:20:30; strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:3|). These false Christs (Matthew:24:24; strkjv@Mark:13:22|) are necessarily antichrists, for there can be only one. \Anti\ can mean substitution or opposition, but both ideas are identical in the word \antichristos\ (in N.T. only here, strkjv@2:22; strkjv@4:3; strkjv@2John:1:7|). Westcott rightly observes that John's use of the word is determined by the Christian conception, not by the Jewish apocalypses. {Have there arisen} (\gegonasin\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. {Many antichrists} (\antichristoi polloi\). Not just one, but the exponents of the Gnostic teaching are really antichrists, just as some modern deceivers deserve this title. {Whereby} (\hothen\). By the fact that these many antichrists have come.
rwp@1John:2:21 @{I have not written} (\ouk egrapsa\). Not epistolary aorist (2:14|), but a reference to what he has just said. {And because no lie is of the truth} (\kai hoti pn pseudos ek ts altheias ouk estin\). Not certain whether \hoti\ here is causal (because) or declarative (that). Either makes sense. Note the idiomatic use of \ek\ and \pn--ouk=ouden\ (no) as in verse 19|.
rwp@1John:3:2 @{Now} (\nun\). Without waiting for the \parousia\ or second coming. We have a present dignity and duty, though there is greater glory to come. {It is not yet made manifest} (\oup ephanerth\). First aorist passive indicative of \phanero\. For the aorist indicative with \oup\ with a future outlook Brooke notes strkjv@Mark:11:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:8:2; strkjv@Hebrews:12:4; strkjv@Revelation:17:10,12|. {What we shall be} (\ti esometha\). Not \tines\ (who), but \ti\ (what) neuter singular predicate nominative. "This _what_ suggests something unspeakable, contained in the likeness of God" (Bengel). {If he shall be manifested} (\ean phanerthi\). As in strkjv@2:28|, which see. The subject may be Christ as in verse 9|, or the future manifestation just mentioned. Either makes sense, probably "it" here better than "he." {Like him} (\homoioi auti\). \Auti\ is associative instrumental case after \homoioi\. This is our destiny and glory (Romans:8:29|), to be like Jesus who is like God (2Corinthians:4:6|). {We shall see him even as he is} (\opsometha auton kaths estin\). Future middle indicative of \hora\. The transforming power of this vision of Christ (1Corinthians:13:12|) is the consummation of the glorious process begun at the new birth (2Corinthians:3:18|).
rwp@1John:3:4 @{Sin is lawlessness} (\h hamartia estin h anomia\). The article with both subject and predicate makes them coextensive and so interchangeable. Doing sin is the converse of doing righteousness (2:29|). The present active participle (\poin\) means the habit of doing sin.
rwp@1John:3:12 @{Of the evil one} (\ek tou ponrou\). Ablative case and the same for neuter and masculine singular, but verse 10| makes it clear that the reference is to the devil. {Slew} (\esphaxen\). First aorist active indicative of \sphaz\, old verb, to slay, to butcher, to cut the throat (Latin _jugulare_) like an ox in the shambles, in N.T. only here and Rev. (Revelation:5:6,9,12|, etc.). {Wherefore?} (\charin tinos;\). "For the sake of what?" Post-positive preposition (Ephesians:3:1,14|) except here. The interpretation of the act of Cain (Genesis:4:8ff.|) is an addition to the narrative, but in accord with strkjv@Hebrews:11:4|. Jealousy led to murder.
rwp@1John:4:17 @{Herein} (\en touti\). It is not clear whether the \hina\ clause (sub-final use) is in apposition with \en touti\ as in strkjv@John:15:8| or the \hoti\ clause (because) with the \hina\ clause as parenthesis. Either makes sense. Westcott argues for the latter idea, which is reinforced by the preceding sentence. {With us} (\meth' hmn\). Construed with the verb \teteleitai\ (is perfected). In contrast to \en hmin\ (verses 12,16|), emphasising cooperation. "God works with man" (Westcott). For boldness (\parrsian\) in the day of judgment (only here with both articles, but often with no articles as in strkjv@2Peter:2:9|) see strkjv@2:28|. {As he is} (\kaths ekeinos estin\). That is Christ as in strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:3,5,7,16|. Same tense (present) as in strkjv@3:7|. "Love is a heavenly visitant" (David Smith). We are in this world to manifest Christ.
rwp@1John:5:6 @{This} (\houtos\). Jesus the Son of God (verse 5|). {He that came} (\ho elthn\). Second aorist active articular participle of \erchomai\, referring to the Incarnation as a definite historic event, the preexistent Son of God "sent from heaven to do God's will" (Brooke). {By water and blood} (\di' hudatos kai haimatos\). Accompanied by (\dia\ used with the genitive both as instrument and accompaniment, as in strkjv@Galatians:5:13|) water (as at the baptism) and blood (as on the Cross). These two incidents in the Incarnation are singled out because at the baptism Jesus was formally set apart to his Messianic work by the coming of the Holy Spirit upon him and by the Father's audible witness, and because at the Cross his work reached its culmination ("It is finished," Jesus said). There are other theories that do not accord with the language and the facts. It is true that at the Cross both water and blood came out of the side of Jesus when pierced by the soldier, as John bore witness (John:19:34|), a complete refutation of the Docetic denial of an actual human body for Jesus and of the Cerinthian distinction between Jesus and Christ. There is thus a threefold witness to the fact of the Incarnation, but he repeats the twofold witness before giving the third. The repetition of both preposition (\en\ this time rather than \dia\) and the article (\ti\ locative case) argues for two separate events with particular emphasis on the blood ("not only" \ouk monon\, "but" \all'\) which the Gnostics made light of or even denied. {It is the Spirit that beareth witness} (\to pneuma estin to marturoun\). Present active articular participle of \marture\ with article with both subject and predicate, and so interchangeable as in strkjv@3:4|. The Holy Spirit is the third and the chief witness at the baptism of Jesus and all through his ministry. {Because} (\hoti\). Or declarative "that." Either makes sense. In strkjv@John:15:26| Jesus spoke of "the Spirit of truth" (whose characteristic is truth). Here John identifies the Spirit with truth as Jesus said of himself (John:14:6|) without denying personality for the Holy Spirit.
rwp@1Peter:1:6 @{Wherein} (\en hi\). This translation refers the relative \hi\ to \kairi\, but it is possible to see a reference to \Christou\ (verse 3|) or to \theou\ (verse 5|) or even to the entire content of verses 3-5|. Either makes sense, though possibly \kairi\ is correct. {Ye greatly rejoice} (\agallisthe\). Present middle indicative (rather than imperative) of \agalliaomai\, late verb from \agallomai\, to rejoice, only in LXX, N.T., and ecclesiastical literature as in strkjv@Matthew:5:12|. {Now for a little while} (\oligon arti\). Accusative case of time (\oligon\) probably as in strkjv@Mark:6:31|, though it can be used of space (to a small extent) as in strkjv@Luke:5:3|. {If need be} (\ei deon\). Present active neuter singular participle of \dei\ (it is necessary). Some MSS. have \estin\ after \deon\ (periphrastic construction). Condition of first class. {Though ye have been put to grief} (\lupthentes\). First aorist passive participle (concessive circumstantial use) of \lupe\, to make sorrowful (from \lup\, sorrow), old and common verb. See strkjv@2Corinthians:6:10|. {In manifold temptations} (\en poikilois peirasmois\). Just the phrase in strkjv@James:1:2|, which see for discussion. "Trials" clearly right here as there. Seven N.T. writers use \poikilos\ (varied).
rwp@1Peter:1:23 @{Having been begotten again} (\anagegennmenoi\). Perfect passive participle of \anagenna\, which see in verse 2|. {Not of corruptible seed} (\ouk ek spors phtharts\). Ablative with \ek\ as the source, for \phthartos\ see verse 18|, and \spors\ (from \speir\ to sow), old word (sowing, seed) here only in N.T., though \sporos\ in strkjv@Mark:4:26f.|, etc. For "incorruptible" (\aphthartou\) see verse 4; strkjv@3:4|. {Through the word of God} (\dia logou theou\). See strkjv@James:1:18| for "by the word of truth," verse 25| here, and Peter's use of \logos\ in strkjv@Acts:10:36|. It is the gospel message. {Which liveth and abideth} (\zntos kai menontos\). These present active participles (from \za\ and \men\) can be taken with \theou\ (God) or with \logou\ (word). In verse 25| \menei\ is used with \rma\ (word). Still in strkjv@Daniel:6:26| both \menn\ and \zn\ are used with \theos\. Either construction makes sense here.
rwp@1Thessalonians:1:8 @{From you hath sounded forth} (\aph' humn exchtai\). Perfect passive indicative of \exche\, late compound verb (\ex, chos, ch, ch\, our echo) to sound out of a trumpet or of thunder, to reverberate like our echo. Nowhere else in the N.T. Songs:"from you" as a sounding board or radio transmitting station (to use a modern figure). It marks forcibly "both the clear and the persuasive nature of the \logos tou Kuriou\" (Ellicott). This phrase, the word of the Lord, may be subjective with the Lord as its author or objective with the Lord as the object. It is both. It is a graphic picture with a pardonable touch of hyperbole (Moffatt) for Thessalonica was a great commercial and political centre for disseminating the news of salvation (on the Egnation Way). {But in every place} (\all' en panti topi\). In contrast to Macedonia and Achaia. The sentence would naturally stop here, but Paul is dictating rapidly and earnestly and goes on. {Your faith to God-ward} (\h pistis humn h pros ton theon\). Literally, {the faith of you that toward the God}. The repeated article makes clear that their faith is now directed toward the true God and not toward the idols from which they had turned (verse 10|). {Is gone forth} (\exelluthen\). Second perfect active indicative of old verb \exerchomai\, to go out, state of completion like \exchtai\ above. {Songs:that we need not to speak anything} (\hste m chreian echein hms lalein ti\). \Hste\ with the infinitive for actual result as in verse 7|. No vital distinction between \lalein\ (originally to chatter as of birds) and \legein\, both being used in the _Koin_ for speaking and preaching (in the N.T.).
rwp@1Thessalonians:2:16 @{Forbidding us} (\kluontn hms\). Explanatory participle of the idea in \enantin\. They show their hostility to Paul at every turn. Right here in Corinth, where Paul is when he writes, they had already shown venomous hostility toward Paul as Luke makes plain (Acts:18:6ff.|). They not simply oppose his work among the Jews, but also to the Gentiles (\ethnesi\, nations outside of the Abrahamic covenant as they understood it). {That they may be saved} (\hina sthsin\). Final use of \hina\ with first aorist passive subjunctive of \sz\ old verb to save. It was the only hope of the Gentiles, Christ alone and not the mystery-religions offered any real hope. {To fill up their sins alway} (\eis to anaplrsai autn tas hamartias pantote\). Another example of \eis to\ and the infinitive as in verse 12|. It may either be God's conceived plan to allow the Jews to go on and fill up (\anaplrsai\, note \ana\, fill up full, old verb) or it may be the natural result from the continual (\pantote\) sins of the Jews. {Is come} (\ephthasen\). First aorist (timeless aorist) active indicative of \phthan\ which no longer means to come before as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:4:15| where alone in the N.T. it retains the old idea of coming before. Some MSS. have the perfect active \ephthaken\, prophetic perfect of realization already. Frame translates it: "But the wrath has come upon them at last." This is the most likely meaning of \eis telos\. Paul vividly foresees and foretells the final outcome of this attitude of hate on the part of the Jews. _Tristis exitus_, Bengel calls it. Paul speaks out of a sad experience.
rwp@1Thessalonians:4:3 @{Your sanctification} (\ho hagiasmos humn\). Found only in the Greek Bible and ecclesiastical writers from \hagiaz\ and both to take the place of the old words \hagiz, hagismos\ with their technical ideas of consecration to a god or goddess that did not include holiness in life. Songs:Paul makes a sharp and pointed stand here for the Christian idea of sanctification as being "the will of God" (apposition) and as further explained by the epexegetic infinitive {that ye abstain from fornication} (\apechesthai humas apo ts porneias\). Pagan religion did not demand sexual purity of its devotees, the gods and goddesses being grossly immoral. Priestesses were in the temples for the service of the men who came.
rwp@1Thessalonians:4:6 @{That no man transgress} (\to m huperbainein\). Old verb to go beyond. Final use of \to\ (accusative of general reference) and the infinitive (negative \m\), parallel to \apechesthai\ and \eidenai ktasthai\ above. {And wrong his brother} (\kai pleonektein ton adelphon autou\). To take more, to overreach, to take advantage of, to defraud. {In the matter} (\en ti pragmati\). The delicacy of Paul makes him refrain from plainer terms and the context makes it clear enough as in strkjv@2Corinthians:7:11| (\ti pragmati\). {An avenger} (\ekdikos\). Regular term in the papyri for legal avenger. Modern men and women need to remember that God is the avenger for sexual wrongs both in this life and the next.
rwp@1Timothy:2:15 @{Through the child-bearing} (\dia ts teknogonias\). Late and rare word (in Aristotle). Here alone in N.T. From \teknogonos\ and this from \teknon\ and root \gen\. This translation makes it refer to the birth of the Saviour as glorifying womanhood. That is true, but it is not clear that Paul does not have mostly in mind that child-bearing, not public teaching, is the peculiar function of woman with a glory and dignity all its own. "She will be saved" (\sthsetai\) in this function, not by means of it. {If they continue} (\ean meinsin\). Condition of third class, \ean\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \men\, to continue. Note change to plural from the singular (\sthsetai\).
rwp@1Timothy:5:8 @{Provideth not for his own} (\tn idin ou pronoei\). Condition of first class with \ei\ and present active (or middle \pronoeitai\) indicative of \pronoe\, old verb, to think beforehand. Pauline word in N.T. only here, strkjv@2Corinthians:8:21; strkjv@Romans:12:7|. With genitive case. {He hath denied the faith} (\tn pistin rntai\). Perfect middle indicative of old verb \arneomai\. His act of impiety belies (Titus:1:16|) his claim to the faith (Revelation:2:13|). {Worse than an unbeliever} (\apistou cheirn\). Ablative case of \apistou\ after the comparative \cheirn\. Who makes no profession of piety.
rwp@2Corinthians:1:3 @{Blessed} (\eulogtos\). From old verb \euloge\, to speak well of, but late verbal in LXX and Philo. Used of men in strkjv@Genesis:24:31|, but only of God in N.T. as in strkjv@Luke:1:68| and chiefly in Paul (2Corinthians:11:31; strkjv@Romans:1:25|). Paul has no thanksgiving or prayer as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:4-9|, but he finds his basis for gratitude in God, not in them. {The God and Father} (\ho theos kai patr\). Songs:rightly, only one article with both substantives as in strkjv@2Peter:1:1|. Paul gives the deity of Jesus Christ as our Lord (\Kuriou\), but he does not hesitate to use the language here as it occurs. See strkjv@1Peter:1:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:3| where the language is identical with that here. {The father of mercies} (\ho patr tn oiktirmn\) and God of all comfort (\kai theos pass paraklses\). Paul adds an item to each word. He is the compassionate Father characterized by mercies (\oiktirmn\, old word from \oikteir\, to pity, and here in plural, emotions and acts of pity). He is the God of all comfort (\paraklses\, old word from \parakale\, to call to one's side, common with Paul). Paul has already used it of God who gave eternal comfort (2Thessalonians:2:16|). The English word comfort is from the Latin _confortis_ (brave together). The word used by Jesus of the Holy Spirit as the Comforter or Paraklete is this very word (John:14:16; strkjv@16:7|). Paul makes rich use of the verb \parakale\ and the substantive \paraklsis\ in this passage (3-7|). He urges all sorrowing and troubled hearts to find strength in God.
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:2:14 @{But thanks be unto God} (\ti de thei charis\). Sudden outburst of gratitude in contrast to the previous dejection in Troas. Surely a new paragraph should begin here. In point of fact Paul makes a long digression from here to strkjv@6:10| on the subject of the Glory of the Christian Ministry as Bachmann points out in his _Kommentar_ (p. 124), only he runs it from strkjv@2:12-7:1| (_Aus der Tiefe in die Hohe_, Out of the Depths to the Heights). We can be grateful for this emotional outburst, Paul's rebound of joy on meeting Titus in Macedonia, for it has given the world the finest exposition of all sides of the Christian ministry in existence, one that reveals the wealth of Paul's nature and his mature grasp of the great things in service for Christ. See my _The Glory of the Ministry (An Exposition of II Cor. strkjv@2:12-6:10_). {Always} (\pantote\). The sense of present triumph has blotted out the gloom at Troas. {Leadeth in triumph} (\thriambeuonti\). Late common _Koin_ word from \thriambos\ (Latin _triumphus_, a hymn sung in festal processions to Bacchus). Verbs in \-eu\ (like \mathteu\, to make disciples) may be causative, but no example of \thriambeu\ has been found with this meaning. It is always to lead in triumph, in papyri sometimes to make a show of. Picture here is of Paul as captive in God's triumphal procession. {The savour} (\tn osmn\). In a Roman triumph garlands of flowers scattered sweet odour and incense bearers dispensed perfumes. The knowledge of God is here the aroma which Paul had scattered like an incense bearer.
rwp@2Corinthians:3:9 @{Of condemnation} (\ts katakrises\). Genitive, that brings condemnation because unable to obey the law. {Is glory} (\doxa\). No copula, but makes the figure bolder. Paul freely admits the glory for the old dispensation. {Of righteousness} (\ts dikaiosuns\). Marked by and leading to righteousness. See strkjv@11:15|. {Much more} (\polli mallon\). Instrumental case, by much more. {Exceed} (\perisseuei\). Overflow.
rwp@2Corinthians:3:10 @{In this respect} (\en touti ti merei\). The glory on the face of Moses was temporary, though real, and passed away (verse 7|), a type of the dimming of the glory of the old dispensation by the brightness of the new. The moon makes a dim light after the sun rises, "is not glorified" (\ou dedoxastai\, perfect passive indicative of \doxaz\). {By reason of the glory that surpasseth} (\heineken ts huperballouss doxs\). The surpassing (\huper-ball\, throwing beyond) glory. Christ as the Sun of Righteousness has thrown Moses in the shade. Cf. the claims of superiority by Christ in strkjv@Matthew:5-7|.
rwp@2Corinthians:3:18 @{We all} (\hmeis pantes\). All of us Christians, not merely ministers. {With unveiled face} (\anakekalummeni prospi\). Instrumental case of manner. Unlike and like Moses. {Reflecting as in a mirror} (\katoptrizomenoi\). Present middle participle of \katoptriz\, late verb from \katoptron\, mirror (\kata, optron\, a thing to see with). In Philo (_Legis Alleg_. iii. 33) the word means beholding as in a mirror and that idea suits also the figure in strkjv@1Corinthians:13:12|. There is an inscription of third century B.C. with \egkatoptrisasthai eis to hudr\, to look at one's reflection in the water. Plutarch uses the active for mirroring or reflecting and Chrysostom takes it so here. Either makes good sense. The point that Paul is making is that we shall not lose the glory as Moses did. But that is true if we keep on beholding or keep on reflecting (present tense). Only here in N.T. {Are transformed} (\metamorphoumetha\). Present passive (are being transformed) of \metamorpho\, late verb and in papyri. See on ¯Matthew:17:2; strkjv@Mark:9:2| where it is translated "transfigured." It is the word used for heathen mythological metamorphoses. {Into the same image} (\tn autn eikona\). Accusative retained with passive verb \metamorphoumetha\. Into the likeness of God in Christ (1Corinthians:15:48-53; strkjv@Romans:8:17,29; strkjv@Colossians:3:4; strkjv@1John:3:2|). {As from the Lord the Spirit} (\kathaper apo Kuriou pneumatos\). More likely, "as from the Spirit of the Lord."
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:7:2 @{Open your hearts to us} (\chrsate hmas\). Old verb (from \chros\, place), to leave a space, to make a space for, and transitive here as in strkjv@Matthew:19:11|. He wishes no further \stenochria\, tightness of heart, in them (6:12|). "Make room for us in your hearts." He makes this plea to all, even the stubborn minority. {We wronged no man} (\oudena diksamen\). A thing that every preacher ought to be able to say. Cf. strkjv@4:2; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:3; strkjv@Acts:20:26f|. {We corrupted no man} (\oudena ephtheiramen\). We ruined no one. "It may refer to money, or morals, or doctrine" (Plummer). He is answering the Judaizers. {We took advantage of no man} (\oudena epleonektsamen\). That charge was made in Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:4:6|) which see for this late verb and also on ¯2Corinthians:2:11|. He got the best of (note \pleon\ more in the root) no one in any evil way.
rwp@2Corinthians:10:2 @{I beseech} (\deomai\). Songs:here, but \parakal\ in verse 1|. Perhaps, "I beg" suits the new turn here. {That I may not when present show courage} (\to m parn tharrsai\). Articular infinitive (aorist active of \tharre\) in the accusative case with negative \m\ the direct object of \deomai\. Literally, "I beg the not when present (\parn\ nominative present participle agreeing with subject of \tharr\ in spite of being in the accusative infinitive clause, \to m tharrsai\) showing courage." The example of humility in Christ makes Paul drop "from magisterial exhortation to earnest entreaty" (Plummer). {As if we walked according to the flesh} (\hs kata sarka peripatountas\). Another sneering charge as made plain by the use of \hs\ with the participle for the alleged reason.
rwp@2Corinthians:10:7 @{Ye look} (\Blepete\). Either indicative or imperative. Either makes sense but the indicative the best sense. {Before your face} (\kata prospon\). They ought to look below the surface. If it is imperative, they should see the facts. {That he is Christ's} (\Christou einai\). Predicate genitive in indirect discourse).
rwp@2Corinthians:12:18 @{The brother} (\ton adelphon\). Probably the brother of Titus (cf. strkjv@8:18|). {Did Titus take advantage of you?} (\mti epleonektsen humas Titos?\). That puts the issue squarely. {By the same Spirit} (\ti auti pneumati\). That translation refers to the Holy Spirit and makes the case instrumental. The locative case, "in the same spirit," makes it mean that Paul's attitude is the same as that of Titus and most likely is correct, for "in the same steps" (\tois autois ichnesin\) is in locative case.
rwp@2John:1:6 @{Love} (\h agap\). The love just mentioned. {That we should walk} (\hina peripatmen\). Object clause in nominative case in apposition with \agap\, with \hina\ and the present active subjunctive of \peripate\, "that we keep on walking." {The commandment} (\h entol\). The one just mentioned with the same construction with \hina\ as in strkjv@1John:3:23|. John changes from the first person plural to the second (\kousate\ as in strkjv@1John:2:7|, \peripatte\) as in strkjv@1John:2:5,7|. {In it} (\en auti\). Either to \altheii\ (truth) of verse 4|, \agap\ of this verse, or \entol\ of this verse. Either makes good sense, probably "in love." With \peripate\ (walk) we have often \en\ (1John:1:7,11|, etc.) or \kata\ (according to) as in strkjv@Mark:7:5; strkjv@1Corinthians:3:3; strkjv@2Corinthians:10:2|, etc.
rwp@2Peter:2:6 @{Turning into ashes} (\tephrsas\). First aorist participle of \tephro\, late word from \tephra\, ashes (in Dio Cassius of an eruption of Vesuvius, Philo), here alone in N.T. {The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah} (\poleis Sodomn kai Gomorrs\). Genitive of apposition after \poleis\ (cities), though it makes sense as possessive genitive, for strkjv@Jude:1:7| speaks of the cities around these two. The third example, the cities of the plain. See strkjv@Genesis:19:24f|. {Condemned them} (\katekrinen\). First aorist active indicative of \katakrin\, still part of the protasis with \ei\. {With an overthrow} (\katastrophi\). Instrumental case or even dative like \thanati\ with \katakrin\ in strkjv@Matthew:20:18|. But Westcott and Hort reject the word here because not in B C Coptic. {Having made them} (\tetheiks\). Perfect active participle of \tithmi\. {An example} (\hupodeigma\). For which see strkjv@James:5:10; strkjv@John:13:15|. Cf. strkjv@1Peter:2:21|. {Unto those that should live ungodly} (\mellontn asebesin\). Rather, "unto ungodly men of things about to be" (see strkjv@Hebrews:11:20| for this use of \mellontn\). But Aleph A C K L read \asebein\ (present active infinitive) with \mellontn\=\asebsontn\ (future active participle of \asebe\), from which we have our translation.
rwp@Info_1Thessalonians @ SECOND THESSALONIANS FROM CORINTH A.D. 50 OR 51 BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION It is plain that First Thessalonians did not settle all the difficulties in Thessalonica. With some there was precisely the opposite result. There was some opposition to Paul's authority and even defiance. Songs:Paul repeats his "command" for discipline (2Thessalonians:3:6|) as he had done when with them (3:10|). He makes this Epistle a test of obedience (3:14|) and finds it necessary to warn the Thessalonians against the zeal of some deceivers who even invent epistles in Paul's name to carry their point in the church (2:1f.|), an early instance of pseudepigraphic "Pauline" epistles, but not for a "pious" purpose. Paul's keen resentment against the practise should make us slow to accept the pseudepigraphic theory about other Pauline Epistles. He calls attention to his own signature at the close of each genuine letter. As a rule he dictated the epistle, but signed it with his own hand (3:17|). Paul writes to calm excitement (Ellicott) and to make it plain that he had not said that the Second Coming was to be right away.
rwp@2Thessalonians:1:11 @{To which end} (\eis ho\). Songs:Colossians:1:29|. Probably purpose with reference to the contents of verses 5-10|. We have had the Thanksgiving (verses 3-10|) in a long, complicated, but rich period or sentence. Now he makes a brief Prayer (verses 11-12|) that God will fulfil all their hopes and endeavours. Paul and his colleagues can still pray for them though no longer with them (Moffatt). {That} (\hina\). Common after \proseuchomai\ (Colossians:4:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:17; strkjv@Phillipians:1:9|) when the content of the prayer blends with the purpose (purport and purpose). {Count you worthy} (\humas axisi\). Causative verb (aorist active subjunctive) like \kataxio\ in verse 5| with genitive. {Of your calling} (\ts klses\). \Klsis\ can apply to the beginning as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:26; strkjv@Romans:11:29|, but it can also apply to the final issue as in strkjv@Phillipians:3:14; strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|. Both ideas may be here. It is God's calling of the Thessalonians. {And fulfil every desire of goodness} (\kai plrsi pasan eudokian agathsuns\). "Whom he counts worthy he first makes worthy" (Lillie). Yes, in purpose, but the wonder and the glory of it all is that God begins to count us worthy in Christ before the process is completed in Christ (Romans:8:29f.|). But God will see it through and so Paul prays to God. \Eudokia\ (cf. strkjv@Luke:2:14|) is more than mere desire, rather good pleasure, God's purpose of goodness, not in ancient Greek, only in LXX and N.T. \Agathsun\ like a dozen other words in \-sun\ occurs only in late Greek. This word occurs only in LXX, N.T., writings based on them. It is made from \agathos\, good, akin to \agamai\, to admire. May the Thessalonians find delight in goodness, a worthy and pertinent prayer. {Work of faith} (\ergon pistes\). The same phrase in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3|. Paul prays for rich fruition of what he had seen in the beginning. Work marked by faith, springs from faith, sustained by faith. {With power} (\en dunamei\). In power. Connect with \plrsi\ (fulfil), God's power (Romans:1:29; strkjv@Colossians:1:4|) in Christ (1Corinthians:1:24|) through the Holy Spirit (1Thessalonians:1:5|).
rwp@2Thessalonians:3:5 @{Direct} (\kateuthunai\). First aorist active optative of wish for the future as in strkjv@2:17; strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:23| from \kateuthun\, old verb, as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:11| (there {way}, here {hearts}) and strkjv@Luke:1:79| of {feet} (\podas\). Perfective use of \kata\. Bold figure for making smooth and direct road. The Lord here is the Lord Jesus. {Into the love of God} (\eis tn agapn tou theou\). Either subjective or objective genitive makes sense and Lightfoot pleads for both, "not only as an objective attribute of deity, but as a ruling principle in our hearts," holding that it is "seldom possible to separate the one from the other." Most scholars take it here as subjective, the characteristic of God. {Into the patience of Christ} (\eis tn hupomnn tou Christou\). There is the same ambiguity here, though the subjective idea, the patience shown by Christ, is the one usually accepted rather than "the patient waiting for Christ" (objective genitive).
rwp@2Timothy:3:16 @{Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable} (\psa graph theopneustos kai phelimos\). There are two matters of doubt in this clause. One is the absence of the article \h\ before \graph\, whether that makes it mean "every scripture" or "all scripture" as of necessity if present. Unfortunately, there are examples both ways with both \ps\ and \graph\. Twice we find \graph\ in the singular without the article and yet definite (1Peter:2:6; strkjv@2Peter:1:20|). We have \ps Isral\ (Romans:11:26|) for all Israel (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 772). Songs:far as the grammatical usage goes, one can render here either "all scripture" or "every scripture." There is no copula (\estin\) in the Greek and so one has to insert it either before the \kai\ or after it. If before, as is more natural, then the meaning is: "All scripture (or every scripture) is inspired of God and profitable." In this form there is a definite assertion of inspiration. That can be true also of the second way, making "inspired of God" descriptive of "every scripture," and putting \estin\ (is) after \kai\: "All scripture (or every scripture), inspired of God, is also profitable." {Inspired of God} (\theopneustos\). "God-breathed." Late word (Plutarch) here only in N.T. Perhaps in contrast to the commandments of men in strkjv@Titus:1:14|. {Profitable} (\phelimos\). See strkjv@1Timothy:4:8|. See strkjv@Romans:15:4|. Four examples of \pros\ (facing, with a view to, for): \didaskalian\, teaching; \elegmon\, reproof, in LXX and here only in N.T.; \epanorthsin\, correction, old word, from \epanortho\, to set up straight in addition, here only in N.T., with which compare \epidiortho\ in strkjv@Titus:1:5|; \paideian\, instruction, with which compare strkjv@Ephesians:6:4|.
rwp@2Timothy:4:8 @{Henceforth} (\loipon\). Accusative case, "for the rest." {There is laid up for me} (\apokeitai moi\). Present passive of \apokeimai\, old verb, to be laid away. See strkjv@Colossians:1:5| for the hope laid away. Paul's "crown of righteousness" (\ho ts dikaiosuns stephanos\, genitive of apposition, the crown that consists in righteousness and is also the reward for righteousness, the victor's crown as in strkjv@1Corinthians:9:25| which see) "is laid away" for him. {At that day} (\en ekeini ti hmeri\). That great and blessed day (1:12,18|). {The righteous judge} (\ho dikaios krits\). "The just judge," the umpire who makes no mistakes who judges us all (2Corinthians:5:10|). {Shall give me} (\apodsei moi\). Future active of \apodidmi\. "Will give back" as in strkjv@Romans:2:6| and in full. {But also to all them that have loved his appearing} (\alla psin tois gapkosin tn epiphaneian autou\). Dative case of the perfect active participle of \agapa\, to love, who have loved and still love his second coming. \Epiphaneia\ here can as in strkjv@1:10| be interpreted of Christ's Incarnation.
rwp@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@Acts:1:1 @{The former treatise} (\ton men prton\). Literally, the first treatise. The use of the superlative is common enough and by no means implies, though it allows, a third volume. This use of \prtos\ where only two are compared is seen between the Baptist and Jesus (John:1:15|), John and Peter (John:20:4|). The idiom is common in the papyri (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 662, 669). The use of \men solitarium\ here, as Hackett notes, is common in Acts. It is by no means true that \men\ requires a following \de\ by contrast. The word is merely a weakened form of \mn\=surely, indeed. The reference is to the "first treatise" and merely emphasizes that. The use of \logos\ (word) for treatise or historical narrative is common in ancient Greek as in Herodotus 6 and 9. Plato (_Phaedo_, p. 61 B) makes a contrast between \muthos\ and \logos\. {I made} (\epoisamn\). Aorist middle indicative, the middle being the usual construction for mental acts with \poie\. {O Theophilus} (\O Theophile\). The interjection \O\ here as is common, though not in strkjv@Luke:1:3|. But the adjective \kratiste\ (most excellent) is wanting here. See remarks on Theophilus on ¯Luke:1:3|. Hackett thinks that he lived at Rome because of the way Acts ends. He was a man of rank. He may have defrayed the expense of publishing both Luke and Acts. Perhaps by this time Luke may have reached a less ceremonious acquaintance with Theophilus. {Which Jesus began} (\hn rxato Isous\). The relative is attracted from the accusative \ha\ to the genitive \hn\ because of the antecedent \pantn\ (all). The language of Luke here is not merely pleonastic as Winer held. Jesus "began" "both to do and to teach" (\poiein te kai didaskein\). Note present infinitives, linear action, still going on, and the use of \te--kai\ binds together the life and teachings of Jesus, as if to say that Jesus is still carrying on from heaven the work and teaching of the disciples which he started while on earth before his ascension. The record which Luke now records is really the Acts of Jesus as much as the Acts of the Apostles. Dr. A. T. Pierson called it "The Acts of the Holy Spirit," and that is true also. The Acts, according to Luke, is a continuation of the doings and teachings of Jesus. "The following writings appear intended to give us, and do, in fact, profess to give us, that which Jesus _continued_ to do and teach after the day in which he was taken up" (Bernard, _Progress of Doctrine in the N.T._).
rwp@Acts:1:3 @{To whom also} (\hois kai\). He chose them and then also manifested himself to these very same men that they might have personal witness to give. {Shewed himself alive} (\parestsen heauton znta\). To the disciples the first Sunday evening (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:36-43; strkjv@John:20:19-25|), the second Sunday evening (John:20:26-29|), at the Sea of Tiberias (John:21:1-23|), on the mountain in Galilee (Matthew:28:16-20; strkjv@Mark:16:15-18; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:6|), to the disciples in Jerusalem and Olivet (Luke:24:44-53; strkjv@Mark:16-19f.; strkjv@Acts:1:1-11|). Luke uses this verb \paristmi\ 13 times in the Acts both transitively and intransitively. It is rendered by various English words (present, furnish, provide, assist, commend). The early disciples including Paul never doubted the fact of the Resurrection, once they were convinced by personal experience. At first some doubted like Thomas (Mark:16:14; strkjv@Luke:24:41; strkjv@John:20:24f.; strkjv@Matthew:28:17|). But after that they never wavered in their testimony to their own experience with the Risen Christ, "whereof we are witnesses" Peter said (Acts:3:15|). They doubted at first, that we may believe, but at last they risked life itself in defence of this firm faith. {After his passion} (\meta to pathein auton\). Neat Greek idiom, \meta\ with the articular infinitive (second aorist active of \pasch\) and the accusative of general reference, "after the suffering as to him." For \pathein\ used absolutely of Christ's suffering see also strkjv@Acts:17:3; strkjv@26:23|. {By many proofs} (\en pollois tekmriois\). Literally, "in many proofs." \Tekmrion\ is only here in the N.T., though an old and common word in ancient Greek and occurring in the _Koin_ (papyri, etc.). The verb \tekmair\, to prove by sure signs, is from \tekmar\, a sign. Luke does not hesitate to apply the definite word "proofs" to the evidence for the Resurrection of Christ after full investigation on the part of this scientific historian. Aristotle makes a distinction between \tekmrion\ (proof) and \smeion\ (sign) as does Galen the medical writer. {Appearing} (\optanomenos\). Present middle participle from late verb \optan\, late _Koin_ verb from root \opt\ seen in \opsomai, phthn\. In LXX, papyri of second century B.C. (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 83). Only here in the N.T. For \optasia\ for vision see strkjv@Acts:26:19; strkjv@Luke:1:22; strkjv@24:23|. {By the space of forty days} (\di' hmern tesserakonta\). At intervals (\dia\, between) during the forty days, ten appearances being known to us. Jesus was not with them continually now in bodily presence. The period of forty days is given here alone. The Ascension was thus ten days before Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came. Moses was in the mount forty days (Exodus:24:18|) and Jesus fasted forty days (Matthew:4:2|). In the Gospel of Luke 24 this separation of forty days between the Resurrection and the Ascension is not drawn. {The things concerning the Kingdom of God} (\ta peri ts basileias tou theou\). This phrase appears 33 times in Luke's Gospel, 15 times in Mark, 4 times in Matthew who elsewhere has "the kingdom of heaven," once in John, and 6 times in Acts. No essential distinction is to be drawn between the two for the Jews often used "heaven" rather than "God" to avoid using the Tetragrammaton. But it is noticeable how the word kingdom drops out of Acts. Other words like gospel (\euaggelion\) take the place of "kingdom." Jesus was fond of the word "kingdom" and Luke is fond of the idiom "the things concerning" (\ta peri\). Certainly with Jesus the term "kingdom" applies to the present and the future and covers so much that it is not strange that the disciples with their notions of a political Messianic kingdom (Acts:1:6|) were slow to comprehend the spiritual nature of the reign of God.
rwp@Acts:2:33 @{By the right hand of God} (\ti dexii tou theou\). This translation makes it the instrumental case. The margin has it "at" instead of "by," that is the locative case. And it will make sense in the true dative case, "to the right hand of God." These three cases came to have the same form in Greek. strkjv@Romans:8:24| furnishes another illustration of like ambiguity (\ti elpidi\), saved by hope, in hope, or for hope. Usually it is quite easy to tell the case when the form is identical. {Exalted} (\hupstheis\). First aorist passive participle of \hupso\, to lift up. Here both the literal and tropical sense occurs. Cf. strkjv@John:12:32|. {The promise of the Holy Spirit} (\tn epaggelian tou pneumatos tou hagiou\). The promise mentioned in strkjv@1:4| and now come true, consisting in the Holy Spirit "from the Father" (\para tou patros\), sent by the Father and by the Son (John:15:26; strkjv@16:7|). See also strkjv@Galatians:3:14|. {He hath poured forth} (\execheen\). Aorist active indicative of \ekche\ the verb used by Joel and quoted by Peter already in verses 17,18|. Jesus has fulfilled his promise. {This which ye see and hear} (\touto ho humeis kai blepete kai akouete\). This includes the sound like the rushing wind, the tongues like fire on each of them, the different languages spoken by the 120. "The proof was before their eyes in this new energy from heaven" (Furneaux), a culminating demonstration that Jesus was the Messiah.
rwp@Acts:7:14 @{Three-score and fifteen souls} (\en psuchais hebdomkonta pente\). Stephen follows the LXX which counts some grandchildren of Joseph and so makes it 75 whereas strkjv@Genesis:46:26| has 66 and then the next verse makes it 70| including Jacob and Joseph with his two sons. The use of \en\ means "consisting in."
rwp@Acts:7:16 @{They were carried over unto Shechem} (\metetethsan eis Suchem\). First aorist passive of \metatithmi\, only here in the N.T. in this sense of changing places. Jacob was buried in the cave of Machpelah (Genesis:50:13|). The O.T. does not say where the sons of Jacob were buried save that Joseph was buried in Shechem (Joshua:24:32|). Possibly only "our fathers" without Jacob is the subject of "were carried." {Which Abraham bought} (\hi nsato Abraam\). Hackett is sure that our present text is wrong. Hort notes some sixty "primitive errors" in the critical text of the N.T. It is possible that this is also one. If "Jacob" is substituted for "Abraham," the matter is cleared up. "It is quite as likely, judging _a priori_, that the word producing the error escaped from some early copyist as that so glaring an error was committed by Stephen" (Hackett). At any rate Abraham bought a burying-place, the cave of Machpelah, from Ephron the Hittite at Hebron (Genesis:23:16|), while Jacob bought a field from the sons of Hamor at Shechem (Genesis:33:19; strkjv@Joshua:24:32|). Abraham had built an altar at Shechem when he entered Canaan (Genesis:12:6f.|). It is possible, of course, that Abraham also bought the ground on which the altar stood. {In Shechem} (\en Suchem\). This is the reading of Aleph B C instead of the Textus Receptus \tou Suchem\ which makes it "Hamar the father of Sichem." "In Shechem" is the true reading.
rwp@Acts:7:31 @{The sight} (\to horama\). Used of visions in the N.T. as in strkjv@Matthew:17:9|. {As he drew near} (\proserchomenou autou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \proserchomai\. {A voice of the Lord} (\phn kuriou\). Here the angel of Jehovah of verse 30| is termed Jehovah himself. Jesus makes powerful use of these words in his reply to the Sadducees in defence of the doctrine of the resurrection and the future life (Mark:12:26; strkjv@Matthew:22:32; strkjv@Luke:20:37f.|) that God here describes himself as the God of the living. {Trembled} (\entromos genomenos\). Literally, becoming tremulous or terrified. The adjective \entromos\ (\en, tromos\ from \trem\, to tremble, to quake) occurs in Plutarch and the LXX. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:16:29|. {Durst not} (\ouk etolma\). Imperfect active, was not daring, negative conative imperfect.
rwp@Acts:9:2 @{Asked} (\itsato\). First aorist middle indicative, the indirect middle, asked for himself (as a favour to himself). Felten notes that "Saul as a Pharisee makes request of a Sadducee" (the high priest) either Caiaphas if before A.D. 35, but if in 36 Jonathan, son of Caiaphas or if in 37 Theophilus, another son of Caiaphas. {Letters} (\epistolas\). Julius Ceasar and Augustus had granted the high priest and Sanhedrin jurisdiction over Jews in foreign cities, but this central ecclesiastical authority was not always recognized in every local community outside of Judea. Paul says that he received his authority to go to Damascus from the priests (Acts strkjv@26:10|) and "the estate of the elders" (22:5|), that is the Sanhedrin. {To Damascus} (\eis Damaskon\). As if no disciples of importance (outside the apostles in Jerusalem) were left in Judea. Damascus at this time may have been under the rule of Aretas of Arabia (tributary to Rome) as it certainly was a couple of years later when Saul escaped in a basket (2Corinthians:11:32|). This old city is the most enduring in the history of the world (Knowling). It is some 150 miles Northeast from Jerusalem and watered by the river Abana from Anti-Lebanon. Here the Jews were strong in numbers (10,000 butchered by Nero later) and here some disciples had found refuge from Saul's persecution in Judea and still worshipped in the synagogues. Paul's language in strkjv@Acts:26:11| seems to mean that Damascus is merely one of other "foreign cities" to which he carried the persecution. {If he found} (\ean heuri\). Third class condition with aorist subjunctive retained after secondary tense (asked). {The Way} (\ts hodou\). A common method in the Acts for describing Christianity as the Way of life, absolutely as also in strkjv@19:9,23; strkjv@22:4; strkjv@24:14,22| or the way of salvation (16:17|) or the way of the Lord (18:25|). It is a Jewish definition of life as in strkjv@Isaiah:40:3| "the way of the Lord," strkjv@Psalms:1:6| "the way of the righteous," "the way of the wicked." Jesus called himself "the way" (John:14:6|), the only way to the Father. The so-called Epistle of Barnabas presents the Two Ways. The North American Indians call Christianity the Jesus Road. {That he might bring them bound} (\hops dedemenous agagi\). Final clause with \hops\ (less common than \hina\) and aorist (effective) subjunctive (\agagi\, reduplicated aorist of \ag\, common verb) and perfect passive participle (\dedemenous\) of \de\, in a state of sheer helplessness like his other victims both men and women. Three times (8:3; strkjv@9:2; strkjv@22:4|) this fact of persecuting women is mentioned as a special blot in Paul's cruelty (the third time by Paul himself) and one of the items in his being chief of sinners (1Timothy:1:15|).
rwp@Acts:9:10 @{Ananias} (\Hananias\). Name common enough (cf. strkjv@5:1| for another Ananias) and means "Jehovah is gracious." _Nomen et omen_ (Knowling). This Ananias had the respect of both Jews and Christians in Damascus (22:12|). {In a vision} (\en horamati\). Zeller and others scout the idea of the historicity of this vision as supernatural. Even Furneaux holds that "it is a characteristic of the Jewish Christian sources to point out the Providential ordering of events by the literary device of a vision," as "in the early chapters of Matthew's and Luke's Gospels." He is content with this "beautiful expression of the belief" with no interest in the actual facts. But that is plain illusion, not to say delusion, and makes both Paul and Luke deceived by the story of Ananias (9:10-18; strkjv@22:12-16,26|). One MS. of the old Latin Version does omit the vision to Ananias and that is basis enough for those who deny the supernatural aspects of Christianity.
rwp@Acts:9:22 @{Increased the more} (\mllon enedunamouto\). Imperfect passive indicative of \endunamo\, to receive power (late verb), progressive increase in strength as opposition grew. Saul's recantation stirred controversy and Saul grew in power. See also Paul in strkjv@Phillipians:4:13; strkjv@1Timothy:1:12; strkjv@2Timothy:2:1; strkjv@4:17; strkjv@Romans:4:20|. Christ, the dynamo of spiritual energy, was now pouring power (Acts:1:8|) into Paul who is already filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts:9:17|). {Confounded} (\sunechunnen\). Imperfect active indicative of \sunchunn\ (late form of \sunche\, to pour together, commingle, make confusion. The more Saul preached, the more the Jews were confused. {Proving} (\sunbibazn\). Present active participle of \sunbibaz\, old verb to make go together, to coalesce, to knit together. It is the very word that Luke will use in strkjv@16:10| of the conclusion reached at Troas concerning the vision of Paul. Here Saul took the various items in the life of Jesus of Nazareth and found in them the proof that he was in reality "the Messiah" (\ho Christos\). This method of argument Paul continued to use with the Jews (Acts:17:3|). It was irresistible argument and spread consternation among the Jews. It was the most powerful piece of artillery in the Jewish camp that was suddenly turned round upon them. It is probable that at this juncture Saul went into Arabia for several years (Galatians:1:12-24|). Luke makes no mention of this important event, but he leaves ample room for it at this point.
rwp@Acts:10:35 @{Acceptable to him} (\dektos auti\). Verbal adjective from \dechomai\. _Acceptabilis_. That is to say, a Gentile would not have to become a Jew in order to become a Christian. Evidently Peter had not before perceived this fact. On the great Day of Pentecost when he spoke of the promise "to all those afar off" (2:39|) Peter understood that they must first become Jews and then Christians. The new idea that now makes a revolution in Peter's outlook is precisely this that Christ can and will save Gentiles like this Cornelius group without their becoming Jews at all.
rwp@Acts:10:37 @{Ye know} (\humeis oidate\). Peter reminds his Gentile audience that the main facts concerning Jesus and the gospel were known to them. Note emphatic expression of \humeis\ (you). {Beginning} (\arxamenos\). The Textus Receptus has \arxamenon\ (accusative), but the nominative is given by Aleph A B C D E H and is certainly correct. But it makes a decided anacoluthon. The accusative would agree with \rhma\ used in the sense of message or story as told by the disciples. The nominative does not agree with anything in the sentence. The same phrase occurs in strkjv@Luke:23:5|. Here is this aorist middle participle almost used like an adverb. See a similar loose use of \arxamenos\ in the same sense by Peter in strkjv@Acts:1:22|. The baptism of John is given as the _terminus a quo_. The story began with a skip to Galilee after the baptism just like the Gospel of Mark. This first message of Peter to the Gentiles (10:37-44|) corresponds in broad outline with Mark's Gospel. Mark heard Peter preach many times and evidently planned his Gospel (the Roman Gospel) on this same model. There is in it nothing about the birth and childhood of Jesus nor about the intervening ministry supplied by John's Gospel for the period (a year) between the baptism and the Galilean Ministry. Peter here presents an objective statement of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus with proof from the Scriptures that he is the Messiah. It is a skilful presentation.
rwp@Acts:10:41 @{Chosen before} (\prokecheirotonmenois\). Perfect passive participle dative plural from \procheirotone\, to choose or designate by hand (\cheirotone, cheir\, hand, and \tein\, to stretch, as in strkjv@Acts:14:23; strkjv@2Corinthians:8:19|), beforehand (\pro\), a double compound as old as Plato, but here alone in the N.T. Peter is evidently stating the thing as it happened and not trying to make a convincing story by saying that both friends and foes saw him after his resurrection. It is the "historian's candour" (Paley) in Luke here that adds to the credibility of the narrative. The sceptical Jews would not have believed and Jesus was kept from open contact with the world of sin after his Passion. {To us who did eat and drink with him} (\hmin hoitines sunephagomen kai sunepiomen auti\). The "who" (\hoitines\) is first person agreeing with "us" (\hmin\). Second aorist active indicative of the common verbs \sunesthi\ and \sumpin\. \Auti\ is associative instrumental case. There are difficulties to us in understanding how Jesus could eat and drink after the resurrection as told here and in strkjv@Luke:24:41-3|, but at any rate Peter makes it clear that it was no hallucination or ghost, but Jesus himself whom they saw after he rose from the dead, "after the rising as to him" (\meta to anastnai auton\, \meta\ with the accusative articular infinitive second aorist active and the accusative \auton\ of general reference). Furneaux dares to think that the disciples misunderstood Jesus about eating after the resurrection. But that is to deny the testimony merely because we cannot explain the transition state of the body of Jesus.
rwp@Acts:10:46 @{They heard} (\kouon\). Imperfect active, were hearing, kept on hearing. {Speak} (\lalountn\). Present active participle, speaking, for they kept it up. {With tongues} (\glssais\). Instrumental case as in strkjv@2:4,11| which see. The fuller statement there makes it clear that here it was new and strange tongues also as in strkjv@19:6; strkjv@1Corinthians:14:4-19|. This sudden manifestation of the Holy Spirit's power on uncircumcised Gentiles was probably necessary to convince Peter and the six brethren of the circumcision that God had opened the door wide to Gentiles. It was proof that a Gentile Pentecost had come and Peter used it effectively in his defence in Jerusalem (Acts:11:15|).
rwp@Acts:11:20 @{Spake} (\elaloun\). Inchoative imperfect active, began to speak. For them it was an experiment. {Unto the Greeks also} (\kai pros tous Hellnas\). This is undoubtedly the correct reading in spite of Hellenists (\Hellnistas\) or Grecian Jews in B E H L P. \Hellnas\ is read by A and D and a corrector of Aleph. The presence of "also" or "even" (\kai\) in Aleph A B makes no sense unless "Greeks" is correct. Hellenists or Grecian Jews as Christians were common enough as is seen in strkjv@Acts:2; 6|. Saul also had preached to the Hellenists in Jerusalem (9:29|). Hellenists were merely one kind of Jews in contrast with those who spoke Aramaic (Acts:6|). It is true that the case of Cornelius was first in importance, but it is not clear that it was before the work in Antioch. Probably the report of the work among the Greeks in Antioch reached Jerusalem after Peter's defence in strkjv@11:1-18|. That explains the calm tone about it and also why Barnabas and not Peter was sent to investigate. Peter and John (Acts:8|) had condoned Philip's work in Samaria and Peter was the agent in the work among the Romans in Caesarea. His position was now well-known and his services discounted for this new crisis. These Greeks in Antioch were apparently in part pure heathen and not "God-fearers" like Cornelius. A man of wisdom was called for. These preachers were themselves Hellenists (verse 19|) and open to the lessons from their environment without a vision such as Peter had at Joppa. "It was a departure of startling boldness" (Furneaux) by laymen outside of the circle of official leaders.
rwp@Acts:12:9 @{Wist not} (\ouk idei\). Past perfect of \oida\ used as imperfect, did not know. {Followed} (\kolouthei\). Imperfect active, kept on following as the angel had directed (verse 8|). That it was true (\hoti althes estin\). Indirect assertion and so present tense retained. Note "true" (\althes\) in the sense of reality or actuality. {Which was done} (\to ginomenon\). Present middle participle, that which was happening. {Thought he saw a vision} (\edokei horama blepein\). Imperfect active, kept on thinking, puzzled as he was. \Blepein\ is the infinitive in indirect assertion without the pronoun (he) expressed which could be either nominative in apposition with the subject as in strkjv@Romans:1:22| or accusative of general reference as in strkjv@Acts:5:36; strkjv@8:9| (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 1036-40). Peter had had a vision in Joppa (10:10|) which Luke describes as an "ecstasy," but here is objective fact, at least Luke thought so and makes that distinction. Peter will soon know whether he is still in the cell or not as we find out that a dream is only a dream when we wake up.
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:13:3 @{When they had fasted} (\nsteusantes\). Either finishing the same fast in verse 2| or another one (Hackett), but clearly a voluntary fast. {Laid their hands upon them} (\epithentes tas cheiras autois\). Second aorist active participle of \epitithmi\. Not ordination to the ministry, but a solemn consecration to the great missionary task to which the Holy Spirit had called them. Whether the whole church took part in this ceremony is not clear, though in strkjv@15:40| "the brethren" did commend Paul and Silas. Perhaps some of them here acted for the whole church, all of whom approved the enterprise. But Paul makes it plain in strkjv@Phillipians:4:15| that the church in Antioch did not make financial contribution to the campaign, but only goodwill. But that was more than the church at Jerusalem would have done as a whole since Peter had been arraigned there for his activities in Caesarea (Acts:11:1-18|). Clearly Barnabas and Saul had to finance the tour themselves. It was Philippi that first gave money to Paul's campaigns. There were still heathen enough in Antioch, but the church approved the going of Barnabas and Saul, their very best.
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:14:15 @{Sirs} (\andres\). Literally, Men. Abrupt, but courteous. {We also are men of like passions with you} (\kai hmeis homoiopatheis esmen humin anthrpoi\). Old adjective from \homoios\ (like) and \pasch\, to experience. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@James:5:17|. It means "of like nature" more exactly and affected by like sensations, not "gods" at all. Their conduct was more serious than the obeisance of Cornelius to Peter (10:25f.|). \Humin\ is associative instrumental case. {And bring you good tidings} (\euaggelizomenoi\). No "and" in the Greek, just the present middle participle, "gospelizing you." They are not gods, but evangelists. Here we have Paul's message to a pagan audience without the Jewish environment and he makes the same line of argument seen in strkjv@Acts:17:21-32; strkjv@Romans:1:18-23|. At Antioch in Pisidia we saw Paul's line of approach to Jews and proselytes (Acts:13:16-41|). {That ye should turn from these vain things} (\apo toutn tn matain epistrephein\). He boldly calls the worship of Jupiter and Mercury and all idols "vain" or empty things, pointing to the statues and the temple. {Unto the living God} (\epi theon znta\). They must go the whole way. Our God is a live God, not a dead statue. Paul is fond of this phrase (2Corinthians:6:16; strkjv@Romans:9:26|). {Who made} (\hos epoisen\). The one God is alive and is the Creator of the Universe just as Paul will argue in Athens (Acts:17:24|). Paul here quotes strkjv@Psalms:146:6| and has strkjv@Genesis:1:1| in mind. See also strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:9| where a new allegiance is also claimed as here.
rwp@Acts:16:7 @{Over against Mysia} (\kata tn Musian\). This was an ill-defined region rather north and west of Phrygia. The Romans finally absorbed most of it in the Province of Asia. {They assayed to go into Bithynia} (\epeirazon eis tn Bithunian poreuthnai\). Conative imperfect of \peiraz\ and ingressive aorist passive infinitive of \poreuomai\. Now Bithynia is northeast of Mysia and north of Galatia (province). Clearly Luke means to say that Paul had, when hindered by the Holy Spirit from going west into Asia, gone north so as to come in front of Bithynia. This journey would take him directly through Phrygia and the North Galatian country (the real Gauls or Celts). This is, to my mind, the strongest argument for the North Galatian view in these verses 6,7|. The grammar and the topography bring Paul right up to Bithynia (north of the old Galatia). It is verses 6,7| that make me pause before accepting the plausible arguments of Ramsay for the South Galatian theory. In itself the problem is nothing like so important or so determinative as he makes it. But shall we smash Luke's grammar to pieces to bolster up a theory of criticism? {And the Spirit of Jesus suffered them not} (\kai ouk eiasen autous to pneuma Isou\). The same Spirit who in verse 6| had forbidden going into Asia now closed the door into Bithynia. This expression occurs nowhere else, but we have the spirit of Christ (Romans:8:9|) and the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phillipians:1:19|). \Eiasen\ is first aorist active indicative of \ea\, old verb to allow.
rwp@Acts:16:9 @{A vision} (\horama\). Old word, eleven times in Acts, once in strkjv@Matthew:17:9|. Twice Paul had been hindered by the Holy Spirit from going where he wanted to go. Most men would have gone back home with such rebuffs, but not so Paul. Now the call is positive and not negative, to go "far hence to the Gentiles" (22:21|). He had little dreamed of such a call when he left Antioch. Paul's frequent visions always came at real crises in his life. {A man of Macedonia} (\anr Makedn\). Ramsay follows Renan in the view that this was Luke with whom Paul had conversed about conditions in Macedonia. Verse 10| makes it plain that Luke was now in the party, but when he joined them we do not know. Some hold that Luke lived at Antioch in Syria and came on with Paul and Silas, others that he joined them later in Galatia, others that he appeared now either as Paul's physician or new convert. Ramsay thinks that Philippi was his home at this time. But, whatever is true about Luke, the narrative must not be robbed of its supernatural aspect (10:10; strkjv@22:17|). {Was standing} (\n hests\). Second perfect active participle of \histmi\, intransitive, periphrastic imperfect. Vivid picture. {Help us} (\bothson hmin\). Ingressive first aorist active imperative of \bothe\ (\bo, the\), to run at a cry, to help. The man uses the plural for all including himself. It was the cry of Europe for Christ.
rwp@Acts:17:16 @{Now while Paul waited for them in Athens} (\En de tais Athnais ekdechomenou autous tou Paulou\). Genitive absolute with present middle participle of \ekdechomai\, old verb to receive, but only with the sense of looking out for, expecting found here and elsewhere in N.T We know that Timothy did come to Paul in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1,6|) from Thessalonica and was sent back to them from Athens. If Silas also came to Athens, he was also sent away, possibly to Philippi, for that church was deeply interested in Paul. At any rate both Timothy and Silas came from Macedonia to Corinth with messages and relief for Paul (Acts:18:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:8f.|). Before they came and after they left, Paul felt lonely in Athens (1Thessalonians:3:1|), the first time on this tour or the first that he has been completely without fellow workers. Athens had been captured by Sulla B.C. 86. After various changes Achaia, of which Corinth is the capital, is a separate province from Macedonia and A.D. 44 was restored by Claudius to the Senate with the Proconsul at Corinth. Paul is probably here about A.D. 50. Politically Athens is no longer of importance when Paul comes though it is still the university seat of the world with all its rich environment and traditions. Rackham grows eloquent over Paul the Jew of Tarsus being in the city of Pericles and Demosthenes, Socrates and Plato and Aristotle, Sophocles and Euripides. In its Agora Socrates had taught, here was the Academy of Plato, the Lyceum of Aristotle, the Porch of Zeno, the Garden of Epicurus. Here men still talked about philosophy, poetry, politics, religion, anything and everything. It was the art centre of the world. The Parthenon, the most beautiful of temples, crowned the Acropolis. Was Paul insensible to all this cultural environment? It is hard to think so for he was a university man of Tarsus and he makes a number of allusions to Greek writers. Probably it had not been in Paul's original plan to evangelize Athens, difficult as all university seats are, but he cannot be idle though here apparently by chance because driven out of Macedonia. {Was provoked} (\parxuneto\). Imperfect passive of \paroxun\, old verb to sharpen, to stimulate, to irritate (from \para, oxus\), from \paroxusmos\ (Acts:15:39|), common in old Greek, but in N.T. only here and strkjv@1Corinthians:13:5|. It was a continual challenge to Paul's spirit when he beheld (\therountos\, genitive of present participle agreeing with \autou\ (his), though late MSS. have locative \therounti\ agreeing with \en auti\). {The city full of idols} (\kateidlon ousan tn polin\). Note the participle \ousan\ not preserved in the English (either the city being full of idols or that the city was full of idols, sort of indirect discourse). Paul, like any stranger was looking at the sights as he walked around. This adjective \kateidlon\ (perfective use of \kata\ and \eidlon\ is found nowhere else, but it is formed after the analogy of \katampelos, katadendron\), full of idols. Xenophon (_de Republ. Ath_.) calls the city \hol bomos, hol thuma theois kai anathma\ (all altar, all sacrifice and offering to the gods). These statues were beautiful, but Paul was not deceived by the mere art for art's sake. The idolatry and sensualism of it all glared at him (Romans:1:18-32|). Renan ridicules Paul's ignorance in taking these statues for idols, but Paul knew paganism better than Renan. The superstition of this centre of Greek culture was depressing to Paul. One has only to recall how superstitious cults today flourish in the atmosphere of Boston and Los Angeles to understand conditions in Athens. Pausanias says that Athens had more images than all the rest of Greece put together. Pliny states that in the time of Nero Athens had over 30,000 public statues besides countless private ones in the homes. Petronius sneers that it was easier to find a god than a man in Athens. Every gateway or porch had its protecting god. They lined the street from the Piraeus and caught the eye at every place of prominence on wall or in the agora.
rwp@Acts:17:23 @{For} (\gar\). Paul gives an illustration of their religiousness from his own experiences in their city. {The objects of your worship} (\ta sebasmata humn\). Late word from \sebazomai\, to worship. In N T. only here and strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:4|. The use of this word for temples, altars, statues, shows the conciliatory tone in the use of \deisidaimonesterous\ in verse 22|. {An altar} (\bmon\). Old word, only here in the N.T. and the only mention of a heathen altar in the N.T {With this inscription} (\en hi epegegrapto\). On which had been written (stood written), past perfect passive indicative of \epigraph\, old and common verb for writing on inscriptions (\epigraph\, strkjv@Luke:23:38|). {To an Unknown God} (\AGNOSTO THEO\). Dative case, dedicated to. Pausanias (I. 1, 4) says that in Athens there are "altars to gods unknown" (\bmoi then agnstn\). Epimenides in a pestilence advised the sacrifice of a sheep to the befitting god whoever he might be. If an altar was dedicated to the wrong deity, the Athenians feared the anger of the other gods. The only use in the N.T. of \agnstos\, old and common adjective (from \a\ privative and \gnstos\ verbal of \ginsk\, to know). Our word agnostic comes from it. Here it has an ambiguous meaning, but Paul uses it though to a stern Christian philosopher it may be the "confession at once of a bastard philosophy and of a bastard religion" (Hort, _Hulsean Lectures_, p. 64). Paul was quick to use this confession on the part of the Athenians of a higher power than yet known to them. Songs:he gets his theme from this evidence of a deeper religious sense in them and makes a most clever use of it with consummate skill. {In ignorance} (\agnoountes\). Present active participle of \agnoe\, old verb from same root as \agnstos\ to which Paul refers by using it. {This set I forth unto you} (\touto ego kataggell humin\). He is a \kataggeleus\ (verse 18|) as they suspected of a God, both old and new, old in that they already worship him, new in that Paul knows who he is. By this master stroke he has brushed to one side any notion of violation of Roman law or suspicion of heresy and claims their endorsement of his new gospel, a shrewd and consummate turn. He has their attention now and proceeds to describe this God left out of their list as the one true and Supreme God. The later MSS. here read \hon--touton\ (whom--this one) rather than \ho--touto\ (what--this), but the late text is plainly an effort to introduce too soon the personal nature of God which comes out clearly in verse 24|.
rwp@Acts:17:27 @{That they should seek God} (\Ztein ton theon\). Infinitive (present active) of purpose again. Seek him, not turn away from him as the nations had done (Romans:1:18-32|). {If haply they might feel after him} (\ei ara ge pslaphseian auton\). First aorist active (Aeolic form) optative of \pslapha\, old verb from \psa\, to touch. Songs:used by the Risen Jesus in his challenge to the disciples (Luke:24:39|), by the Apostle John of his personal contact with Jesus (1John:1:1|), of the contact with Mount Sinai (Hebrews:12:18|). Here it pictures the blind groping of the darkened heathen mind after God to "find him" (\heuroien\, second aorist active optative) whom they had lost. One knows what it is in a darkened room to feel along the walls for the door (Deuteronomy:28:29; strkjv@Job:5:14; strkjv@12:25; strkjv@Isaiah:59:10|). Helen Keller, when told of God, said that she knew of him already, groping in the dark after him. The optative here with \ei\ is due to the condition of the fourth class (undetermined, but with vague hope of being determined) with aim also present (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1021). Note also \ara ge\ the inferential particle \ara\ with the delicate intensive particle \ge\. {Though he is not far from each one of us} (\kai ge ou makran apo henos hekastou hmn huparchonta\). More exactly with B L (\kai ge\ instead of \kaitoi\ or \kaitoi ge\), "and yet being not far from each one of us," a direct statement rather than a concessive one. The participle \huparchonta\ agrees with \auton\ and the negative \ou\ rather than the usual \me\ with the participle makes an emphatic negative. Note also the intensive particle \ge\.
rwp@Acts:18:14 @{When Paul was about to open his mouth} (\mellontos tou Paulou anoigein to stoma\). Genitive absolute again. Before Paul could speak, Gallio cut in and ended the whole matter. According to their own statement Paul needed no defence. {Wrong} (\adikma\). _Injuria_. Old word, a wrong done one. In N.T. only here, strkjv@Acts:24:20; strkjv@Revelation:18:5|. Here it may mean a legal wrong to the state. {Wicked villainy} (\rhidiourgma\). A crime, act of a criminal, from \rhidiourgos\ (\rhidios\, easy, \ergon\, work), one who does a thing with ease, adroitly, a "slick citizen." {Reason would that I should bear with you} (\kata logon an aneschomn humn\). Literally, "according to reason I should have put up with you (or held myself back from you)." This condition is the second class (determined as unfulfilled) and means that the Jews had no case against Paul in a Roman court. The verb in the conclusion (\aneschomn\) is second aorist middle indicative and means with the ablative \humn\ "I should have held myself back (direct middle) from you (ablative). The use of \an\ makes the form of the condition plain.
rwp@Acts:18:27 @{Encouraged him} (\protrepsamenoi\). First aorist middle participle of \protrep\, old verb, to urge forward, to push on, only here in the N.T. Since Apollos wanted (\boulomenou autou\, genitive absolute) to go into Achaia, the brethren (including others besides Priscilla and Aquila) wrote (\egrapsan\) a letter of introduction to the disciples in Corinth to receive him (\apodexasthai auton\), a nice letter of recommendation and a sincere one also. But Paul will refer to this very letter later (2Corinthians:3:1|) and observe that he himself needed no such letter of commendation. The Codex Bezae adds here that certain Corinthians who had come to Ephesus heard Apollos and begged him to cross over with them to Corinth. This may very well be the way that Apollos was led to go. Preachers often receive calls because visitors from other places hear them. Priscilla and Aquila were well known in Corinth and their approval would carry weight. But they did not urge Apollos to stay longer in Ephesus. {Helped them much} (\sunebaleto polu\). Second aorist middle indicative of \sunball\ used in strkjv@17:18| for "dispute," old verb to throw together, in the N.T. always in the active save here in the middle (common in Greek writers) to put together, to help. {Through grace} (\dia ts charitos\). This makes sense if taken with "believed," as Hackett does (cf. strkjv@13:48; strkjv@16:14|) or with "helped" (1Corinthians:3:10; strkjv@15:10; strkjv@2Corinthians:1:12|). Both are true as the references show.
rwp@Acts:19:28 @{They were filled with wrath} (\genomenoi plereis thumou\). Having become full of wrath. {Cried out} (\ekrazon\). Inchoative imperfect, began to cry out and kept it up continuously. Reiteration was characteristic of the orgiastic exercises. The Codex Bezae adds after \thumou\ (wrath): \Dramontes eis tn amphodon\ (running into the street), which they certainly did after the speech of Demetrius. {Great is Artemis of the Ephesians} (\Megal h Artemis Ephesin\). D (Codex Bezae) omits \h\ (the) and makes it read: "Great Artemis of the Ephesians." This was the usual cry of the votaries in their orgies as the inscriptions show, an ejaculatory outcry or prayer instead of an argument as the other MSS. have it. That is vivid and natural (Ramsay, _Church in the Roman Empire_, pp. 135ff.). Yet on this occasion the artisans were making an argumentative protest and plea against Paul. An inscription at Dionysopolis has "Great is Apollo."
rwp@Acts:19:38 @{Have a matter against any one} (\echousin pros tina logon\). For this use of \ech logon\ with \pros\ see strkjv@Matthew:5:32; strkjv@Colossians:3:13|. The town-clerk names Demetrius and the craftsmen (\technitai\) as the parties responsible for the riot. {The courts are open} (\agoraioi agontai\). Supply \hmerai\ (days), court days are kept, or \sunodoi\, court-meetings are now going on, Vulgate _conventus forenses aguntur_. Old adjective from \agora\ (forum) marketplace where trials were held. Cf. strkjv@Acts:17:4|. There were regular court days whether they were in session then or not. {And there are proconsuls} (\kai anthupatoi eisin\). Asia was a senatorial province and so had proconsuls (general phrase) though only one at a time, "a rhetorical plural" (Lightfoot). Page quotes from an inscription of the age of Trajan on an aqueduct at Ephesus in which some of Luke's very words occur (\nekoros, anthupatos, grammateus, dmos\). {Let them accuse one another} (\egkaleitsan alllois\). Present active imperative of \egkale\ (\en, kale\), old verb to call in one's case, to bring a charge against, with the dative. Luke uses the verb six times in Acts for judicial proceedings (19:38,40; strkjv@23:28,29; strkjv@26:2,7|). The town-clerk makes a definite appeal to the mob for orderly legal procedure as opposed to mob violence in a matter where money and religious prejudice unite, a striking rebuke to so-called lynch-law proceedings in lands today where Christianity is supposed to prevail.
rwp@Acts:20:7 @{Upon the first day of the week} (\en de mii tn sabbatn\). The cardinal \mii\ used here for the ordinal \prti\ (Mark:16:9|) like the Hebrew _ehadh_ as in strkjv@Mark:16:2; strkjv@Matthew:28:1; strkjv@Luke:24:1; strkjv@John:20:1| and in harmony with the _Koin_ idiom (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 671). Either the singular (Mark:16:9|) \sabbatou\ or the plural \sabbaton\ as here was used for the week (sabbath to sabbath). For the first time here we have services mentioned on the first day of the week though in strkjv@1Corinthians:16:2| it is implied by the collections stored on that day. In strkjv@Revelation:1:10| the Lord's day seems to be the day of the week on which Jesus rose from the grave. Worship on the first day of the week instead of the seventh naturally arose in Gentile churches, though strkjv@John:20:26| seems to mean that from the very start the disciples began to meet on the first (or eighth) day. But liberty was allowed as Paul makes plain in strkjv@Romans:14:5f|. {When we were gathered together} (\sungmenn hmn\). Genitive absolute, perfect passive participle of \sunag\, to gather together, a formal meeting of the disciples. See this verb used for gatherings of disciples in strkjv@Acts:4:31; strkjv@11:26; strkjv@14:27; strkjv@15:6,30; strkjv@19:7,8; strkjv@1Corinthians:5:4|. In strkjv@Hebrews:10:25| the substantive \episunaggn\ is used for the regular gatherings which some were already neglecting. It is impossible for a church to flourish without regular meetings even if they have to meet in the catacombs as became necessary in Rome. In Russia today the Soviets are trying to break up conventicles of Baptists. They probably met on our Saturday evening, the beginning of the first day at sunset. Songs:these Christians began the day (Sunday) with worship. But, since this is a Gentile community, it is quite possible that Luke means our Sunday evening as the time when this meeting occurs, and the language in strkjv@John:20:19| "it being evening on that day the first day of the week" naturally means the evening following the day, not the evening preceding the day. {To break bread} (\klasai arton\). First aorist active infinitive of purpose of \kla\. The language naturally bears the same meaning as in strkjv@2:42|, the Eucharist or the Lord's Supper which usually followed the \Agap\. See strkjv@1Corinthians:10:16|. The time came, when the \Agap\ was no longer observed, perhaps because of the abuses noted in strkjv@1Corinthians:11:20ff|. Rackham argues that the absence of the article with bread here and its presence (\ton arton\) in verse 11| shows that the \Agap\ is ] referred to in verse 7| and the Eucharist in verse 11|, but not necessarily so because \ton arton\ may merely refer to \arton\ in verse 7|. At any rate it should be noted that Paul, who conducted this service, was not a member of the church in Troas, but only a visitor. {Discoursed} (\dielegeto\). Imperfect middle because he kept on at length. {Intending} (\mell\). Being about to, on the point of. {On the morrow} (\ti epaurion\). Locative case with \hmeri\ understood after the adverb \epaurion\. If Paul spoke on our Saturday evening, he made the journey on the first day of the week (our Sunday) after sunrise. If he spoke on our Sunday evening, then he left on our Monday morning. {Prolonged his speech} (\Pareteinen ton logon\). Imperfect active (same form as aorist) of \paratein\, old verb to stretch beside or lengthwise, to prolong. Vivid picture of Paul's long sermon which went on and on till midnight (\mechri mesonuktiou\). Paul's purpose to leave early next morning seemed to justify the long discourse. Preachers usually have some excuse for the long sermon which is not always clear to the exhausted audience.
rwp@Acts:20:17 @{Called to him} (\metekalesato\). Aorist middle (indirect) indicative of \metakale\, old verb to call from one place to another (\meta\ for "change"), middle to call to oneself, only in Acts in the N.T. (7:14; strkjv@10:32; strkjv@20:17; strkjv@24:25|). Ephesus was some thirty miles, a stiff day's journey each way. They would be with Paul the third day of the stay in Miletus. {The elders of the church} (\tous presbuterous ts ekklsias\). The very men whom Paul terms "bishops" (\episkopous\) in verse 28| just as in strkjv@Titus:1:5,7| where both terms (\presbuterous, ton episkopon\) describe the same office. The term "elder" applied to Christian ministers first appears in strkjv@Acts:11:30| in Jerusalem and reappears in strkjv@15:4,6,22| in connection with the apostles and the church. The "elders" are not "apostles" but are "bishops" (cf. strkjv@Phillipians:1:1|) and with "deacons" constitute the two classes of officers in the early churches. Ignatius shows that in the early second century the office of bishop over the elders had developed, but Lightfoot has shown that it was not so in the first century. Each church, as in Jerusalem, Philippi, Ephesus, had a number of "elders" ("bishops") in the one great city church. Hackett thinks that other ministers from the neighbourhood also came. It was a noble group of preachers and Paul, the greatest preacher of the ages, makes a remarkable talk to preachers with all the earmarks of Pauline originality (Spitta, _Apostelgeschichte_, p. 252) as shown by the characteristic Pauline words, phrases, ideas current in all his Epistles including the Pastoral (testify, course, pure, take heed, presbyter, bishop, acquire, apparel). Luke heard this address as he may and probably did hear those in Jerusalem and Caesarea (Acts:21-26|). Furneaux suggests that Luke probably took shorthand notes of the address since Galen says that his students took down his medical lectures in shorthand: "At any rate, of all the speeches in the Acts this contains most of Paul and least of Luke.... It reveals Paul as nothing else does. The man who spoke it is no longer a man of eighteen centuries ago: he is of yesterday; of today. He speaks as we speak and feels as we feel; or rather as we fain would speak and feel." We have seen and listened to Paul speak to the Jews in Antioch in Pisidia as Luke pictures the scene, to the uneducated pagans at Lystra, to the cultured Greeks in Athens. We shall hear him plead for his life to the Jewish mob in Jerusalem, to the Roman governor Felix in Caesarea, to the Jewish "King" Herod Agrippa II in Caesarea, and at last to the Jews in Rome. But here Paul unbosoms himself to the ministers of the church in Ephesus where he had spent three years (longer than with any other church) and where he had such varied experiences of prowess and persecution. He opens his heart to these men as he does not to the average crowd even of believers. It is Paul's _Apologia pro sua Vita_. He will probably not see them again and so the outlook and attitude is similar to the farewell discourse of Jesus to the disciples in the upper room (John:13-17|). He warns them about future perils as Jesus had done. Paul's words here will repay any preacher's study today. There is the same high conception of the ministry here that Paul had already elaborated in strkjv@2Corinthians:2:12-6:10| (see my _Glory of the Ministry_). It is a fitting time and occasion for Paul to take stock of his ministry at the close of the third mission tour. What wonders had God wrought already.
rwp@Acts:20:20 @{How that I shrank not} (\hs ouden hupesteilamen\). Still indirect discourse (question) after \epistasthe\ (ye know) with \hs\ like \ps\ in verse 18|. First aorist middle of \hupostell\, old verb to draw under or back. It was so used of drawing back or down sails on a ship and, as Paul had so recently been on the sea, that may be the metaphor here. But it is not necessarily so as the direct middle here makes good sense and is frequent, to withdraw oneself, to cower, to shrink, to conceal, to dissemble as in strkjv@Habbakkuk:2:4| (Hebrews:10:38|). Demosthenes so used it to shrink from declaring out of fear for others. This open candour of Paul is supported by his Epistles (1Thessalonians:2:4,11; strkjv@2Corinthians:4:2; strkjv@Galatians:1:10|). {From declaring unto you} (\tou m anaggeilai humin\). Ablative case of the articular first aorist active infinitive of \anaggell\ with the redundant negative after verbs of hindering, etc. (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1094). {Anything that was profitable} (\tn sumpherontn\). Partitive genitive after \ouden\ of the articular present active participle of \sumpher\, to bear together, be profitable. {Publicly} (\dmosii\, adverb) {and from house to house} (\kai kat' oikous\). By (according to) houses. It is worth noting that this greatest of preachers preached from house to house and did not make his visits merely social calls. He was doing kingdom business all the while as in the house of Aquila and Priscilla (1Corinthians:16:19|).
rwp@Acts:21:27 @{The seven days} (\hai hepta hmerai\). For which Paul had taken the vow, though there may be an allusion to the pentecostal week for which Paul had desired to be present (20:16|). There is no necessary connexion with the vow in strkjv@18:15|. In strkjv@24:17| Paul makes a general reference to his purpose in coming to Jerusalem to bring alms and offerings (\prosphoras\, sacrifices). Paul spent seven days in Troas (20:6|), Tyre (21:4|), and had planned for seven here if not more. It was on the last of the seven days when Paul was completing his offerings about the vows on all five that the incident occurred that was to make him a prisoner for five years. {When they saw him in the temple} (\theasamenoi auton en ti hieri\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ (from \thea\, a view, cf. theatre) to behold. In the very act of honouring the temple these Jews from Asia raise a hue and cry that he is dishonouring it. Paul was not known by face now to many of the Jerusalem Jews, though once the leader of the persecution after the death of Stephen and the outstanding young Jew of the day. But the Jews in Ephesus knew him only too well, some of whom are here at the pentecostal feast. They had plotted against him in Ephesus to no purpose (Acts:19:23-41; strkjv@20:19|), but now a new opportunity had come. It is possible that the cry was led by Alexander put forward by the Jews in Ephesus (19:33|) who may be the same as Alexander the coppersmith who did Paul so much harm (2Timothy:4:14|). Paul was not in the inner sanctuary (\ho naos\), but only in the outer courts (\to hieron\). {Stirred up all the multitude} (\sunecheon panta ton ochlon\). Imperfect (kept on) active of \sunche\ or \sunchun\ (\-unn\), to pour together, to confuse as in strkjv@Acts:2:6; strkjv@9:22; strkjv@19:31,32; strkjv@21:31| and here to stir up by the same sort of confusion created by Demetrius in Ephesus where the same word is used twice (19:31,32|). The Jews from Ephesus had learned it from Demetrius the silversmith. {Laid hands on him} (\epebalan ep' auton tas cheiras\). Second aorist (ingressive, with endings of the first aorist, \-an\) active indicative of \epiball\, old verb to lay upon, to attack (note repetition of \epi\). They attacked and seized Paul before the charge was made.
rwp@Acts:21:39 @{I am} (\Eg men eimi\). In contrast with the wild guess of Lysias Paul uses \men\ and \de\. He tells briefly who he is: {a Jew} (\Ioudaios\) by race, {of Tarsus in Cilicia} (\Tarseus ts Kilikias\) by country, belonging to Tarsus (this adjective \Tarseus\ only here and strkjv@Acts:9:11|), and proud of it, one of the great cities of the empire with a great university. {A citizen of no mean city} (\ouk asmou poles polits\). Litotes again, "no mean" (\asmos\, old adjective, unmarked, \a\ privative and \sma\, mark, insignificant, here only in the N.T.). This same litotes used by Euripides of Athens (_Ion_ 8). But Paul calls himself a citizen (\polits\) of Tarsus. Note the "effective assonance" (Page) in \poles polits\. Paul now (\de\) makes his request (\deomai\) of Lysias. {Give me leave} (\epitrepson moi\). First aorist active imperative of \epitrep\, old and common verb to turn to, to permit, to allow. It was a strange request and a daring one, to wish to speak to this mob howling for Paul's blood.
rwp@Acts:22:3 @{I am a Jew} (\Eg eimi anr Ioudaios\). Note use of \Eg\ for emphasis. Paul recounts his Jewish advantages or privileges with manifest pride as in strkjv@Acts:26:4f.; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:22; strkjv@Galatians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {Born} (\gegennmenos\). Perfect passive participle of \genna\. See above in strkjv@21:39| for the claim of Tarsus as his birth-place. He was a Hellenistic Jew, not an Aramaean Jew (cf. strkjv@Acts:6:1|). {Brought up} (\anatethrammenos\). Perfect passive participle again of \anatreph\, to nurse up, to nourish up, common old verb, but in the N.T. only here, strkjv@7:20ff.|, and MSS. in strkjv@Luke:4:16|. The implication is that Paul was sent to Jerusalem while still young, "from my youth" (26:4|), how young we do not know, possibly thirteen or fourteen years old. He apparently had not seen Jesus in the flesh (2Corinthians:5:16|). {At the feet of Gamaliel} (\pros tous podas Gamalil\). The rabbis usually sat on a raised seat with the pupils in a circle around either on lower seats or on the ground. Paul was thus nourished in Pharisaic Judaism as interpreted by Gamaliel, one of the lights of Judaism. For remarks on Gamaliel see chapter strkjv@5:34ff|. He was one of the seven Rabbis to whom the Jews gave the highest title \Rabban\ (our Rabbi). \Rabbi\ (my teacher) was next, the lowest being \Rab\ (teacher). "As Aquinas among the schoolmen was called _Doctor Angelicus_, and Bonaventura _Doctor Seraphicus_, so Gamaliel was called _the Beauty of the Law_" (Conybeare and Howson). {Instructed} (\pepaideumenos\). Perfect passive participle again (each participle beginning a clause), this time of \paideu\, old verb to train a child (\pais\) as in strkjv@7:22| which see. In this sense also in strkjv@1Timothy:1:20; strkjv@Titus:2:12|. Then to chastise as in strkjv@Luke:23:16,22| (which see); strkjv@2Timothy:2:25; strkjv@Hebrews:12:6f|. {According to the strict manner} (\kata akribeian\). Old word, only here in N.T. Mathematical accuracy, minute exactness as seen in the adjective in strkjv@26:5|. See also strkjv@Romans:10:2; Gal strkjv@1:4; strkjv@Phillipians:3:4-7|. {Of our fathers} (\patriou\). Old adjective from \pater\, only here and strkjv@24:14| in N.T. Means descending from father to son, especially property and other inherited privileges. \Patrikos\ (patrician) refers more to personal attributes and affiliations. {Being zealous for God} (\zlts huparchn tou theou\). Not adjective, but substantive {zealot} (same word used by James of the thousands of Jewish Christians in Jerusalem, strkjv@21:20| which see) with objective genitive \tou theou\ (for God). See also verse 14; strkjv@28:17; strkjv@2Timothy:1:3| where he makes a similar claim. Songs:did Peter (Acts:3:13; strkjv@5:30|) and Stephen (7:32|). Paul definitely claims, whatever freedom he demanded for Gentile Christians, to be personally "a zealot for God" "even as ye all are this day" (\kaths pantes humeis este smeron\). In his conciliation he went to the limit and puts himself by the side of the mob in their zeal for the law, mistaken as they were about him. He was generous surely to interpret their fanatical frenzy as zeal for God. But Paul is sincere as he proceeds to show by appeal to his own conduct.
rwp@Acts:23:25 @{And he wrote} (\grapsas\). First aorist active participle of \graph\, agreeing with the subject (Lysias) of \eipen\ (said) back in verse 23| (beginning). {After this form} (\echousan ton tupon touton\). Textus Receptus has \periechousan\. The use of \tupon\ (type or form) like _exemplum_ in Latin (Page who quotes Cicero _Ad Att_. IX. 6. 3) may give merely the purport or substantial contents of the letter. But there is no reason for thinking that it is not a genuine copy since the letter may have been read in open court before Felix, and Luke was probably with Paul. The Roman law required that a subordinate officer like Lysias in reporting a case to his superior should send a written statement of the case and it was termed _elogium_. A copy of the letter may have been given Paul after his appeal to Caesar. It was probably written in Latin. The letter is a "dexterous mixture of truth and falsehood" (Furneaux) with the stamp of genuineness. It puts things in a favourable light for Lysias and makes no mention of his order to scourge Paul.
rwp@Acts:24:4 @{That I be not further tedious unto thee} (\hina m epi pleion se enkopt\). _Koin_ verb (Hippocrates, Polybius) to cut in on (or into), to cut off, to impede, to hinder. Our modern telephone and radio illustrate it well. In the N.T. (Acts:24:4; strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:18; strkjv@Galatians:5:7; strkjv@Romans:15:22; strkjv@1Peter:3:7|). "That I may not cut in on or interrupt thee further (\epi pleion\) in thy reforms." Flattery still. {Of thy clemency} (\ti si epieikeii\). Instrumental case of old word from \epieiks\ and this from \epi\ and \eikos\ (reasonable, likely, fair). "Sweet Reasonableness" (Matthew Arnold), gentleness, fairness. An \epieiks\ man is "one who makes reasonable concessions" (Aristotle, _Eth_. V. 10), while \dikaios\ is "one who insists on his full rights" (Plato, _Leg_. 757 D) as translated by Page. {A few words} (\suntoms\). Old adverb from \suntemn\, to cut together (short), abbreviate. Like \dia brachen\ in strkjv@Hebrews:13:22|. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:16| (shorter conclusion).
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:26:5 @{Having knowledge of me from the first} (\proginskontes me anthen\). Literally, "knowing me beforehand" (both \pro\ and \anthen\), from the beginning of Paul's public education in Jerusalem (Knowling). Cf. strkjv@2Peter:3:17|. {If they be willing to testify} (\ean thelsin marturein\). Condition of third class (\ean\ and subjunctive). A neat turning of the tables on the distinguished audience about Paul's Jerusalem reputation before his conversion. {After the straitest sect} (\tn akribestatn hairesin\). This is a true superlative (not elative) and one of the three (also \hagitatos\, strkjv@Jude:1:20|, \timitatos\ strkjv@Revelation:18:12; strkjv@21:11|) superlatives in \-tatos\ in the N.T. (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 279f., 670), though common enough in the LXX and the papyri. \Hairesin\ (choosing) is properly used here with Pharisees (Josephus, _Life_, 38). {Religion} (\thrskeias\). From \thrskeu\ and this from \thrskos\ (James:1:26|), old word for religious worship or discipline, common in the papyri and inscriptions (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_) for reverent worship, not mere external ritual. In N.T. only here, strkjv@James:1:26f.; strkjv@Colossians:2:18|. {I lived a Pharisee} (\ezsa Pharisaios\). Emphatic position. Paul knew the rules of the Pharisees and played the game to the full (Galatians:1:14; strkjv@Phillipians:3:5f.|). The Talmud makes it plain what the life of a Pharisee was. Paul had become one of the leaders and stars of hope for his sect.
rwp@Colossians:1:17 @{Before all things} (\pro pantn\). \Pro\ with the ablative case. This phrase makes Paul's meaning plain. The precedence of Christ in time and the preeminence as Creator are both stated sharply. See the claim of Jesus to eternal timeless existence in strkjv@John:8:58; strkjv@17:5|. See also strkjv@Revelation:23:13| where Christ calls himself the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning (\arch\) and the End (\telos\). Paul states it also in strkjv@2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f|. {Consist} (\sunestken\). Perfect active indicative (intransitive) of \sunistmi\, old verb, to place together and here to cohere, to hold together. The word repeats the statements in verse 16|, especially that in the form \ektistai\. Christ is the controlling and unifying force in nature. The Gnostic philosophy that matter is evil and was created by a remote aeon is thus swept away. The Son of God's love is the Creator and the Sustainer of the universe which is not evil.
rwp@Colossians:2:13 @{And you} (\kai humas\). Emphatic position, object of the verb \sunezopoisen\ (did he quicken) and repeated (second \hums\). You Gentiles as he explains. {Being dead through your trespasses} (\nekrous ontas tois paraptmasin\). Moral death, of course, as in strkjv@Romans:6:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:1,5|. Correct text does not have \en\, but even so \paraptmasin\ (from \parapipt\, to fall beside or to lapse, strkjv@Hebrews:6:6|), a lapse or misstep as in strkjv@Matthew:6:14; strkjv@Romans:5:15-18; strkjv@Galatians:6:1|, can be still in the locative, though the instrumental makes good sense also. {And the uncircumcision of your flesh} (\kai ti akroboustii ts sarkos humn\). "Dead in your trespasses and your alienation from God, of which the uncircumcision of your flesh was a symbol" (Abbott). Clearly so, "the uncircumcision" used merely in a metaphorical sense. {Did he quicken together with him} (\sunezopoisen sun auti\). First aorist active indicative of the double compound verb \sunzopoie\, to make alive (\zos, poie\) with (\sun\, repeated also with \auti\, associative instrumental), found only here and in strkjv@Ephesians:2:5|, apparently coined by Paul for this passage. Probably \theos\ (God) is the subject because expressly so stated in strkjv@Ephesians:2:4f.| and because demanded by \sun auti\ here referring to Christ. This can be true even if Christ be the subject of \rken\ in verse 14|. {Having forgiven us} (\charisamenos hmin\). First aorist middle participle of \charizomai\, common verb from \charis\ (favour, grace). Dative of the person common as in strkjv@3:13|. The act of forgiving is simultaneous with the quickening, though logically antecedent.
rwp@Colossians:2:16 @{Let no one judge you} (\m tis humas krinet\). Prohibition present active imperative third singular, forbidding the habit of passing judgment in such matters. For \krin\ see on ¯Matthew:7:1|. Paul has here in mind the ascetic regulations and practices of one wing of the Gnostics (possibly Essenic or even Pharisaic influence). He makes a plea for freedom in such matters on a par with that in strkjv@1Corinthians:8-9; strkjv@Romans:14; 15|. The Essenes went far beyond the Mosaic regulations. For the Jewish feasts see on ¯Galatians:4:10|. Josephus (_Ant_. III. 10, 1) expressly explains the "seventh day" as called "_sabbata_" (plural form as here, an effort to transliterate the Aramaic _sabbathah_).
rwp@Colossians:2:20 @{If ye died} (\ei apethanete\). Condition of the first class, assumed as true, \ei\ and second aorist active indicative of \apothnsk\, to die. He is alluding to the picture of burial in baptism (2:12|). {From the rudiments of the world} (\apo tn stoichein tou kosmou\). See strkjv@2:8|. {As though living in the world} (\hs zntes en kosmi\). Concessive use of the participle with \hs\. The picture is that of baptism, having come out (F. B. Meyer) on the other side of the grave, we are not to act as though we had not done so. We are in the Land of Beulah. {Why do ye subject yourselves to ordinances?} (\ti dogmatizesthe?\). Late and rare verb (three examples in inscriptions and often in LXX) made from \dogma\, decree or ordinance. Here it makes good sense either as middle or passive. In either case they are to blame since the bond of decrees (2:14|) was removed on the Cross of Christ. Paul still has in mind the rules of the ascetic wing of the Gnostics (2:16ff.|).
rwp@Colossians:3:16 @{The word of Christ} (\ho logos tou Christou\). This precise phrase only here, though "the word of the Lord" in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:8; strkjv@4:15; strkjv@2Thessalonians:3:1|. Elsewhere "the word of God." Paul is exalting Christ in this Epistle. \Christou\ can be either the subjective genitive (the word delivered by Christ) or the objective genitive (the word about Christ). See strkjv@1John:2:14|. {Dwell} (\enoikeit\). Present active imperative of \enoike\, to make one's home, to be at home. {In you} (\en humin\). Not "among you." {Richly} (\plousis\). Old adverb from \plousios\ (rich). See strkjv@1Timothy:6:17|. The following words explain \plousis\. {In all wisdom} (\en pasi sophii\). It is not clear whether this phrase goes with \plousis\ (richly) or with the participles following (\didaskontes kai nouthetountes\, see strkjv@1:28|). Either punctuation makes good sense. The older Greek MSS. had no punctuation. There is an anacoluthon here. The participles may be used as imperatives as in strkjv@Romans:12:11f.,16|. {With psalms} (\psalmois\, the Psalms in the Old Testament originally with musical accompaniment), {hymns} (\humnois\, praises to God composed by the Christians like strkjv@1Timothy:3:16|), {spiritual songs} (\idais pneumatikais\, general description of all whether with or without instrumental accompaniment). The same song can have all three words applied to it. {Singing with grace} (\en chariti idontes\). In God's grace (2Corinthians:1:12|). The phrase can be taken with the preceding words. The verb \id\ is an old one (Ephesians:5:19|) for lyrical emotion in a devout soul. {In your hearts} (\en tais kardiais humn\). Without this there is no real worship "to God" (\ti thei\). How can a Jew or Unitarian in the choir lead in the worship of Christ as Saviour? Whether with instrument or with voice or with both it is all for naught if the adoration is not in the heart.
rwp@1Peter:1:1 makes ref to LXX "23:4; 38 or 39 12". unsure how to handle
rwp@Ephesians:1:7 @{In whom} (\en hi\). Just like strkjv@Colossians:1:14| with \paraptmatn\ (trespasses) in place of \hamartin\ (sins) and with the addition of \dia tou haimatos autou\ (through his blood) as in strkjv@Colossians:1:20|. Clearly Paul makes the blood of Christ the cost of redemption, the ransom money (\lutron\, strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@Mark:10:45|; \antilutron\, strkjv@1Timothy:2:6|). See strkjv@Colossians:1:9|.
rwp@Ephesians:2:15 @{Having abolished} (\katargsas\). First aorist active participle of \katarge\, to make null and void. {The enmity} (\tn echthran\). But it is very doubtful if \tn echthran\ (old word from \echthros\, hostile, strkjv@Luke:23:12|) is the object of \katargsas\. It looks as if it is in apposition with to \mesotoichon\ and so the further object of \lusas\. The enmity between Jew and Gentile was the middle wall of partition. And then it must be decided whether "in his flesh" (\en ti sarki autou\) should be taken with \lusas\ and refer especially to the Cross (Colossians:1:22|) or be taken with \katargsas\. Either makes sense, but better sense with \lusas\. Certainly "the law of commandments in ordinances (\ton nomon tn entoln en dogmasin\) is governed by \katargsas\. {That he might create} (\hina ktisi\). Final clause with first aorist active subjunctive of \ktiz\. {The twain} (\tous duo\). The two men (masculine here, neuter in verse 14|), Jew and Gentile. {One new man} (\eis hena kainon anthrpon\). Into one fresh man (Colossians:3:9-11|) "in himself" (\en hauti\). Thus alone is it possible. {Making peace} (\poin eirnn\). Thus alone can it be done. Christ is the peace-maker between men, nations, races, classes.
rwp@Ephesians:5:32 @{This mystery is great} (\to mustrion touto mega estin\). For the word "mystery" see strkjv@1:9|. Clearly Paul means to say that the comparison of marriage to the union of Christ and the church is the mystery. He makes that plain by the next words. {But I speak} (\eg de leg\). "Now I mean." Cf. strkjv@1Corinthians:7:29; strkjv@15:50|. {In regard of Christ and of the church} (\eis Christon kai [eis] tn ekklsian\). "With reference to Christ and the church." That is all that \eis\ here means.
rwp@Info_Epistles-Pastorial @ Objections on internal grounds are made on the lines laid down by Baur and followed by Renan. They are chiefly four. The "most decisive" as argued by McGiffert (_History of Christianity in the Apostolic Age_, p. 402) is that "the Christianity of the Pastoral Epistles is not the Christianity of Paul." He means as we know Paul in the other Epistles. But this charge is untrue. It is true that Paul here lists faith with the virtues, but he does that in strkjv@Galatians:5:22|. Nowhere does Paul give a loftier word about faith than in strkjv@1Timothy:1:12-17|. Another objection urged is that the ecclesiastical organization seen in the Pastoral Epistles belongs to the second century, not to the time of Paul's life. Now we have the Epistles of Ignatius in the early part of the second century in which "bishop" is placed over "elders" of which there is no trace in the New Testament (Lightfoot). A forger in the second century would certainly have reproduced the ecclesiastical organization of that century instead of the first as we have it in the Pastoral Epistles. There is only here the normal development of bishop (=elder) and deacon. A third objection is made on the ground that there is no room in Paul's life as we know it in the Acts and the other Pauline Epistles for the events alluded to in the Pastoral Epistles and it is also argued on late and inconclusive testimony that Paul was put to death A.D. 64 and had only one Roman imprisonment. If Paul was executed A.D. 64, this objection has force in it, though Bartlet (_The Apostolic Age_) tries to make room for them in the period covered by the Acts. Duncan makes the same attempt for the Pauline scraps admitted by him as belonging to the hypothecated imprisonment in Ephesus. But, if we admit the release of Paul from the first Roman imprisonment, there is ample room before his execution in A.D. 68 for the events referred to in the Pastoral Epistles and the writing of the letters (his going east to Ephesus, Macedonia, to Crete, to Troas, to Corinth, to Miletus, to Nicopolis, to Rome), including the visit to Spain before Crete once planned for (Romans:15:24,28|) and mentioned by Clement of Rome as a fact ("the limit of the west"). The fourth objection is that of the language in the Pastoral Epistles. Probably more men are influenced by this argument than by any other. The ablest presentation of this difficulty is made by P. N. Harrison in _The Problem of the Pastoral Epistles_ (1921). Besides the arguments Dr. Harrison has printed the Greek text in a fashion to help the eye see the facts. Words not in the other Pauline Epistles are in red, Pauline phrases (from the other ten) are underlined, _hapax legomena_ are marked by an asterisk. At a superficial glance one can see that the words here not in the other Pauline Epistles and the common Pauline phrases are about equal. The data as to mere words are broadly as follows according to Harrison: Words in the Pastorals, not elsewhere in the N.T. (Pastoral _hapax legomena_) 175 (168 according to Rutherford); words in the other ten Pauline Epistles not elsewhere in the N.T. 470 (627 according to Rutherford). Variations in MSS. will account for some of the difficulty of counting. Clearly there is a larger proportion of new words in the Pastorals (about twice as many) than in the other Pauline Epistles. But Harrison's tables show remarkable differences in the other Epistles also. The average of such words per page in Romans is 4, but 5.6 in II Corinthians, 6.2 in Philippians, and only 4 in Philemon. Parry (_Comm._, p. CXVIII) notes that of the 845 words in the Pastorals as compared with each other 278 occur only in I Tim., 96 only in Titus, 185 only in II Tim. "If vocabulary alone is taken, this would point to separate authorship of each epistle." And yet the same style clearly runs through all three. After all vocabulary is not wholly a personal problem. It varies with age in the same person and with the subject matter also. Precisely such differences exist in the writings of Shakespeare and Milton as critics have long ago observed. The only problem that remains is whether the differences are so great in the Pastoral Epistles as to prohibit the Pauline authorship when "Paul the aged" writes on the problem of pastoral leadership to two of the young ministers trained by him who have to meet the same incipient Gnostic heresy already faced in Colossians and Ephesians. My judgment is that, all things considered, the contents and style of the Pastoral Epistles are genuinely Pauline, mellowed by age and wisdom and perhaps written in his own hand or at least by the same amanuensis in all three instances. Lock suggests Luke as the amanuensis for the Pastorals.
rwp@Info_Epistles-Paul @ DATES OF HIS EPISTLES Unfortunately there is not complete agreement among scholars as to the dates of some of Paul's Epistles. Baur denied the Pauline authorship of all the Epistles save I and II Corinthians, Galatians, Romans. Today some deny that Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles, though admitting the others. Some admit Pauline fragments even in the Pastoral Epistles, but more about this when these Epistles are reached. There is more doubt about the date of Galatians than any of the others. Lightfoot put it just before Romans, while Ramsay now makes it the earliest of all. The Epistle itself has no notes of place or time. The Epistles to the Thessalonians were written from Corinth after Timothy had been sent from Athens by Paul to Thessalonica (1Thessalonians:3:1f.|) and had just returned to Paul (1Thessalonians:3:6|) which we know was in Corinth (Acts:18:5|) shortly before Gallio came as Proconsul of Achaia (Acts:18:12|). We can now feel certain from the new "acclamation" of Claudius in the inscription at Delphi recently explained by Deissmann in his _St. Paul_ that the Thessalonian Epistles were written 50 to 51 A.D. We know also that he wrote I Corinthians while in Ephesus (1Corinthians:16:8|) and before pentecost, though the precise year is not given. But he spent three years at Ephesus in round numbers (Acts:19:8,10; strkjv@20:31|) and he wrote just before he left, probably spring of A.D. 54 or 55. He wrote II Corinthians from Macedonia shortly after leaving Ephesus (2Corinthians:2:12|) ] apparently the same year. Romans was written from Corinth and sent by Phoebe of Cenchreae (Romans:16:1f.|) unless strkjv@Romans:16| be considered a separate Epistle to Ephesus as some hold, a view that does not commend itself to me. Deissmann (_New Testament in the Light of Modern Research_, p. 33) accepts a modern theory that Ephesus was the place of the writing of the first prison Epistles (Philippians, Philemon, Colossians, Ephesians) as well as I Corinthians and Galatians and dates them all between A.D. 52 and 55. But we shall find that these prison Epistles most naturally fall to Rome between A.D. 61 and 63. If the Pastoral Epistles are genuine, as I hold, they come between A.D. 65 and 68. Bartlet argues for a date before A.D. 64, accepting the view that Paul was put to death then. But it is still far more probable that Paul met his death in Rome in A.D. 68 shortly before Nero's death which was June 8, A.D. 68. It will thus be seen that the dates of several of the Epistles are fairly clear, while some remain quite uncertain. In a broad outlook they must all come between A.D. 50 and 68.
rwp@Galatians:3:10 @{Under a curse} (\hupo kataran\). Picture of the curse hanging over them like a Damocles' blade. Cf. strkjv@Romans:3:9| "under sin" (\huph' hamartian\). The word for "curse" (\katara\) is an old one (\kata\, down, \ara\, imprecation), often in LXX, in N.T. only here and 13; strkjv@James:3:10; strkjv@2Peter:2:14|. Paul quotes strkjv@Deuteronomy:27:26|, the close of the curses on Mt. Ebal. He makes a slight explanatory modification of the LXX changing \logois\ to \gegrammenois en ti biblii\. The idea is made clearer by the participle (\gegrammenois\) and \biblii\ (book). The curse becomes effective only when the law is violated. {Cursed} (\epikataratos\). Verbal adjective from \epikataraomai\, to imprecate curses, late word, common in LXX. In N.T. only here and verse 13|, but in inscriptions also (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 96). The emphasis is on "continueth" (\emmenei\) and "all" (\psin\).
rwp@Galatians:4:15 @{That gratulation of yourselves} (\ho makarismos humn\). "Your felicitation." Rare word from \makariz\, to pronounce happy, in Plato, Aristotle, Plutarch. See also strkjv@Romans:4:6,9|. You no longer felicitate yourselves on my presence with you. {Ye would have plucked out your eves and given them to me} (\tous ophthalmous humn exoruxantes edkate moi\). This is the conclusion of a condition of the second class without \an\ expressed which would have made it clearer. But see strkjv@John:16:22,24; strkjv@Romans:7:7| for similar examples where the context makes it plain without \an\. It is strong language and is saved from hyperbole by "if possible" (\ei dunaton\). Did Paul not have at this time serious eye trouble?
rwp@Galatians:5:19 @{Manifest} (\phanera\). Opposed to "hidden" (\krupta\). Ancient writers were fond of lists of vices and virtues. Cf. Stalker's sermons on _The Seven Cardinal Virtues_ and _The Seven Deadly Sins_. There are more than seven in this deadly list in verses 19-21|. He makes the two lists in explanation of the conflict in verse 17| to emphasize the command in verses 13f|. There are four groups in Paul's list of manifest vices: (I) Sensual sins like fornication (\porneia\, prostitution, harlotry), uncleanness (\akatharsia\, moral impurity), lasciviousness (\aselgeia\, wantonness), sexual vice of all kinds prevailed in heathenism. (2) Idolatry (\eidlatreia\, worship of idols) and witchcraft (\pharmakeia\ from \pharmakon\, a drug, the ministering of drugs), but the sorcerers monopolized the word for a while in their magical arts and used it in connection with idolatry. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:18:23|. See strkjv@Acts:19:19| \perierga\, curious arts. (3) Personal relations expressed by eight words, all old words, sins of the spirit, like enmities (\exthrai\, personal animosities), strife (\eris\, rivalry, discord), jealousies (\zlos\ or \zloi\, MSS. vary, our very word), wraths (\thumoi\, stirring emotions, then explosions), factions (\eritheiai\, from \erithos\, day labourer for hire, worker in wool, party spirit), divisions (\dichostasiai\, splits in two, \dicha\ and \stasis\), heresies (\haireseis\, the very word, but really choosings from \haireomai\, preferences), envyings (\phthonoi\, feelings of ill-will). Surely a lively list. (4) {Drunkenness} (\methai\, old word and plural, drunken excesses, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:21:34; strkjv@Romans:13:13|), revellings (\kmoi\, old word also for drinking parties like those in honour of Bacchus, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Romans:13:13; strkjv@1Peter:4:3|). {And such like} (\kai ta homoia toutois\). And the things like these (associative instrumental \toutois\ after \homoia\, like). It is not meant to be exhaustive, but it is representative.
rwp@Hebrews:1:7 @{Of the angels} (\pros tous aggelous\). "With reference to" (\pros\) as in strkjv@Luke:20:9|. Songs:"of the Son" in verse 8|. Note \men\ here and \de\ in verse 8| in carefully balanced contrast. The quotation is from strkjv@Psalms:104:4|. {Winds} (\pneumata\). "Spirits" the word also means. The meaning (note article with \aggelous\, not with \pneumata\) apparently is one that can reduce angels to the elemental forces of wind and fire (Moffatt). {A flame of fire} (\puros phloga\). Predicate accusative of \phlox\, old word, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:16:24|. Lunemann holds that the Hebrew here is wrongly rendered and means that God makes the wind his messengers (not angels) and flaming fire his servants. That is all true, but that is not the point of this passage. Preachers also are sometimes like a wind-storm or a fire.
rwp@Hebrews:1:8 @{O God} (\ho theos\). This quotation (the fifth) is from strkjv@Psalms:45:7f|. A Hebrew nuptial ode (\epithalamium\) for a king treated here as Messianic. It is not certain whether \ho theos\ is here the vocative (address with the nominative form as in strkjv@John:20:28| with the Messiah termed \theos\ as is possible, strkjv@John:1:18|) or \ho theos\ is nominative (subject or predicate) with \estin\ (is) understood: "God is thy throne" or "Thy throne is God." Either makes good sense. {Sceptre} (\rabdos\). Old word for walking-stick, staff (Hebrews:11:21|).
rwp@Hebrews:2:5 @{For not unto angels} (\ou gar aggelois\). The author now proceeds to show (2:5-18|) that the very humanity of Jesus, the Son of Man, likewise proves his superiority to angels. {The world to come} (\tn oikoumenn tn mellousan\). The new order, the salvation just described. See a like use of \mell\ (as participle) with \stria\ (1:14|), \ain\ (6:4f.|), \agatha\ (9:11; strkjv@10:1|), \polis\ (13:14|). {Whereof we speak} (\peri hs laloumen\). The author is discussing this new order introduced by Christ which makes obsolete the old dispensation of rites and symbols. God did not put this new order in charge of angels.
rwp@Hebrews:3:1 @{Holy brethren} (\adelphoi hagioi\). Only here in N.T., for \hagiois\ in strkjv@1Thessalonians:5:27| only in late MSS. See strkjv@Hebrews:2:11| for same idea. First time the author makes direct appeal to the readers, though first person in strkjv@2:1|. {Partakers} (\metochoi\). See strkjv@Luke:5:7| for "partners" in the fishing, elsewhere in N.T. only in Hebrews (1:9; strkjv@6:4; strkjv@12:8|) in N.T. {Of a heavenly calling} (\klses epouraniou\). Only here in the N.T., though same idea in strkjv@9:15|. See \h an klsis\ in strkjv@Phillipians:3:14| (the upward calling). The call comes from heaven and is to heaven in its appeal. {Consider} (\katanosate\). First aorist active imperative of \katanoe\, old compound verb (\kata, nous\), to put the mind down on a thing, to fix the mind on as in strkjv@Matthew:7:3; strkjv@Luke:12:24|. {Even Jesus} (\Isoun\). No "even" in the Greek, just like the idiom in strkjv@2:9|, the human name held up with pride. {The Apostle and High Priest of our confession} (\ton apostolon kai archierea ts homologias hmn\). In descriptive apposition with \Isoun\ and note the single article \ton\. This is the only time in the N.T. that Jesus is called \apostolos\, though he often used \apostell\ of God's sending him forth as in strkjv@John:17:3| (\apesteilas\). This verb is used of Moses as sent by God (Exodus:3:10|). Moffatt notes that \apostolos\ is Ionic for \presbeuts\, "not a mere envoy, but an ambassador or representative sent with powers." The author has already termed Jesus high priest (2:17|). For \homologia\ (confession) see strkjv@2Corinthians:9:13; strkjv@1Timothy:6:12|. These Hebrew Christians had confessed Jesus as their Apostle and High Priest. They do not begin to understand what Jesus is and means if they are tempted to give him up. The word runs through Hebrews with an urgent note for fidelity (4:14; strkjv@10:23|). See \homologe\ (\homon\, same, \leg\, say), to say the same thing, to agree, to confess, to profess.
rwp@Hebrews:3:2 @{Who was faithful} (\piston onta\). Present active participle with predicate accusative agreeing with \Isoun\, "as being faithful." {That appointed him} (\ti poisanti auton\). See strkjv@1Samuel:12:6|. Dative case of the articular participle (aorist active) of \poie\ and the reference is to God. Note \pistos\ as in strkjv@2:17|. {As also was Moses} (\hs kai Muss\). The author makes no depreciatory remarks about Moses as he did not about the prophets and the angels. He cheerfully admits that Moses was faithful "in all his house" (\en holi ti oiki autou\), an allusion to strkjv@Numbers:12:7| (\ean holi ti oiki mou\) about Moses. The "his" is God's. The use of \oikos\ for the people (family) of God, not the building, but the group (1Timothy:3:15|) in which God is the Father. But wherein is Jesus superior to Moses? The argument is keen and skilful.
rwp@Hebrews:3:6 @{Whose house are we} (\hou oikos esmen hmeis\). We Christians (Jew and Gentile) looked at as a whole, not as a local organization. {If we hold fast} (\ean kataschmen\). Condition of third class with \ean\ and second aorist (effective) active subjunctive of \katech\. This note of contingency and doubt runs all through the Epistle. We are God's house if we do not play the traitor and desert. {Boldness} (\parrsian\) {and glorying} (\kai kauchma\) some had lost. The author makes no effort to reconcile this warning with God's elective purpose. He is not exhorting God, but these wavering Christians. All these are Pauline words. B does not have \mechri telous bebaian\ (firm unto the end), but it is clearly genuine in verse 14|. He pleads for intelligent confidence.
rwp@Hebrews:3:10 @{And saw} (\kai eidon\). "And yet saw." {Wherefore} (\dio\). Not in the LXX, but it makes clear the argument in the Psalm. {I was displeased} (\proschthisa\). First aorist active of \prosochthiz\, late compound for extreme anger and disgust. In N.T. only here and verse 17|. {Err} (\planntai\). Present middle indicative of \plana\, to wander astray, common verb. {They did not know} (\ouk egnsan\). In spite of God's works (\erga\) and loving patience the Israelites failed to understand God's ways with them. Are we any better? They "cared not to take my road" (Moffatt).
rwp@Hebrews:5:2 @{Who can bear gently} (\metriopathein dunamenos\). Present active infinitive of the late verb \metriopathe\ (\metrios\, moderate, \pate\, to feel or suffer). It is a philosophical term used by Aristotle to oppose the \apatheia\ (lack of feeling) of the Stoics. Philo ranks it below \apatheia\. Josephus (_Ant_. XII. 32) uses it of the moderation of Vespasian and Titus towards the Jews. It occurs here only in the N.T. "If the priest is cordially to plead with God for the sinner, he must bridle his natural disgust at the loathsomeness of sensuality, his impatience at the frequently recurring fall, his hopeless alienation from the hypocrite and the superficial, his indignation at any confession he hears from the penitent" (Dods). {With the ignorant} (\tois agnoousin\). Dative case of the articular present active participle of \agnoe\, old verb not to know (Mark:9:32|). {And erring} (\kai planmenois\). Present middle participle (dative case) of \plana\. The one article with both participles probably makes it a hendiadys, sins of ignorance (both accidence and sudden passion) as opposed to high-handed sins of presumption and deliberate purpose. People who sinned "willingly" (\hekousis\, strkjv@10:26|) had no provision in the Levitical system. For deliberate apostasy (3:12; strkjv@10:26|) no pardon is offered. {Is compassed with infirmity} (\perikeitai astheneian\). Present passive indicative of the old verb \perikeimai\ here used transitively as in strkjv@Acts:28:20| (\halusin\, chain). The priest himself has weakness lying around him like a chain. Not so Jesus.
rwp@Hebrews:7:7 @{Dispute} (\antilogias\). Ablative case with \chris\. For the word see strkjv@6:16|. The writer makes a parenthetical generalization and uses the article and neuter adjective (\to elasson\, the less, \hupo tou kreittonos\, by the better), a regular Greek idiom.
rwp@Hebrews:11:1 @{Now faith is} (\estin de pistis\). He has just said that "we are of faith" (10:39|), not of apostasy. Now he proceeds in a chapter of great eloquence and passion to illustrate his point by a recital of the heroes of faith whose example should spur them to like loyalty now. {The assurance of things hoped for} (\elpizomenn hupostasis\). {Hupostasis} is a very common word from Aristotle on and comes from \huphistmi\ (\hupo\, under, \histmi\, intransitive), what stands under anything (a building, a contract, a promise). See the philosophical use of it in strkjv@1:3|, the sense of assurance (une assurance certaine, Mngoz) in strkjv@3:14|, that steadiness of mind which holds one firm (2Corinthians:9:4|). It is common in the papyri in business documents as the basis or guarantee of transactions. "And as this is the essential meaning in strkjv@Hebrews:11:1| we venture to suggest the translation 'Faith is the _title-deed_ of things hoped for'" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_, etc.). {The proving of things not seen} (\pragmatn elegchos ou blepomenn\). The only N.T. example of \elegchos\ (except Textus Receptus in strkjv@2Timothy:3:16| for \elegmon\). Old and common word from \elegch\ (Matthew:18:15|) for "proof" and then for "conviction." Both uses occur in the papyri and either makes sense here, perhaps "conviction" suiting better though not in the older Greek.
rwp@Hebrews:12:11 @{For the present} (\pros to paron\). A classical phrase (Thucydides), \pros\ with the accusative neuter singular articular participle of \pareimi\, to be beside. {Not joyous, but grievous} (\ou charas, alla lups\). Predicate ablative (springing from) or predicate genitive (marked by). Either makes sense, but note predicate ablative in strkjv@2Corinthians:4:7| (\kai tou theou kai m ex hmn\). {Peaceable fruit} (\karpon eirnikon\). Old adjective from \eirn\ (peace), in N.T. only here and strkjv@James:3:17|. Peaceable after the chastening is over. {Exercised thereby} (\di' auts gegumnasmenois\). Perfect passive participle (dative case) of \gumnaz\, state of completion, picturing the discipline as a gymnasium like strkjv@5:14; strkjv@1Timothy:4:17|.
rwp@Info_James @ THE READERS The author addresses himself "to the twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion" (Jam strkjv@1:1|). Clearly, then, he is not writing to Gentiles, unless he includes the spiritual children of Abraham in the term \Diaspora\ as Paul does for believers (Galatians:3:29; strkjv@Romans:9:6f.|). The word \diaspora\ occurs elsewhere in the N.T. only in strkjv@John:7:35; strkjv@1Peter:1:1|. It apparently has the spiritual significance in strkjv@1Peter:1:1|, but in strkjv@John:7:35| the usual meaning of Jews scattered over the world. The use here of "the twelve tribes" makes the literal sense probable here. Clearly also James knew nothing of any "lost" tribes, for the Jews of the Dispersion were a blend of all the twelve tribes. It is probable also that James is addressing chiefly the Eastern Dispersion in Syria, Mesopotamia, and Babylonia as Peter writes to five provinces in the Western Dispersion in Asia Minor. It is possible that James has in mind Christian and non-Christian Jews, not wholly non-Christian Jews as some hold. He may have in mind merely Christian Jews outside of Palestine, of whom there were already many scattered since the great pentecost. The use of synagogue as a place of worship (James:2:2|) like church (James:5:14|) argues somewhat for this view. He presents the Mosaic law as still binding (James:2:9-11; strkjv@4:11|). As the leading elder of the great church in Jerusalem and as a devout Jew and half-brother of Jesus, the message of James had a special appeal to these widely scattered Jewish Christians.
rwp@James:1:2 @{Count it} (\hgsasthe\). First aorist middle imperative of \hgeomai\, old verb to consider. Do it now and once for all. {All joy} (\psan charan\). "Whole joy," " unmixed joy," as in strkjv@Phillipians:2:29|. Not just "some joy" along with much grief. {When} (\hotan\). "Whenever," indefinite temporal conjunction. {Ye fall into} (\peripeste\). Second aorist active subjunctive (with the indefinite \hotan\) from \peripipt\, literally to fall around (into the midst of), to fall among as in strkjv@Luke:10:30| \listais periepesen\ (he fell among robbers). Only other N.T. example of this old compound is in strkjv@Acts:27:41|. Thucydides uses it of falling into affliction. It is the picture of being surrounded (\peri\) by trials. {Manifold temptations} (\peirasmois poikilois\). Associative instrumental case. The English word temptation is Latin and originally meant trials whether good or bad, but the evil sense has monopolized the word in our modern English, though we still say "attempt." The word \peirasmos\ (from \peiraz\, late form for the old \peira\ as in strkjv@Acts:26:21|, both in good sense as in strkjv@John:6:6|, and in bad sense as in strkjv@Matthew:16:1|) does not occur outside of the LXX and the N.T. except in Dioscorides (A.D. 100?) of experiments on diseases. "Trials" is clearly the meaning here, but the evil sense appears in verse 12| (clearly in \peiraz\ in verse 13|) and so in strkjv@Hebrews:3:8|. Trials rightly faced are harmless, but wrongly met become temptations to evil. The adjective \poikilos\ (manifold) is as old as Homer and means variegated, many coloured as in strkjv@Matthew:4:24; strkjv@2Timothy:3:6; strkjv@Hebrews:2:4|. In strkjv@1Peter:1:6| we have this same phrase. It is a bold demand that James here makes.
rwp@James:1:11 @{Ariseth} (\aneteilen\). Gnomic or timeless aorist active indicative of the old compound \anatell\, used here of plants (cf. \anathall\ in strkjv@Phillipians:4:10|), often of the sun (Matthew:13:6|). {With the scorching wind} (\sun ti kausni\). Associative instrumental case with \sun\. In the LXX this late word (from \kausos\) is usually the sirocco, the dry east wind from the desert (Job:1:19|). In strkjv@Matthew:20:12; strkjv@Luke:12:55| it is the burning heat of the sun. Either makes sense here. {Withereth} (\exranen\). Another gnomic aorist active indicative (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 837) of \xrain\, old verb (from \xros\, dry or withered, strkjv@Matthew:12:10|), to dry up. Grass and flowers are often used to picture the transitoriness of human life. {Falleth} (\exepesen\). Another gnomic aorist (second aorist active indicative) of \ekpipt\ to fall out (off). {The grace} (\h euprepeia\). Old word (from \eupreps\ well-looking, not in the N.T.), only here in N.T. Goodly appearance, beauty. {Of the fashion of it} (\tou prospou autou\). "Of the face of it." The flower is pictured as having a "face," like a rose or lily. {Perisheth} (\apleto\). Another gnomic aorist (second aorist middle indicative of \apollumi\, to destroy, but intransitive here, to perish). The beautiful rose is pitiful when withered. {Shall fade away} (\maranthsetai\). Future passive indicative of \marain\, old verb, to extinguish a flame, a light. Used of roses in Wisdom strkjv@2:8. {Goings} (\poreiais\). Old word from \poreu\ to journey, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:13:22| (of Christ's journey toward Jerusalem). The rich man's travels will come to "journey's end."
rwp@James:2:16 @{And one of you say unto them} (\eipi de tis autois ex humn\). Third-class condition again continued from verse 15| with second aorist active subjunctive \eipi\. {Go in peace} (\hupagete en eirni\). Present active imperative of \hupag\. Common Jewish farewell (Judges:18:6; strkjv@1Samuel:1:17; strkjv@20:42; strkjv@2Samuel:15:9|). Used by Jesus (Mark:5:34; strkjv@Luke:7:50|). {Be ye warmed and filled} (\thermainesthe kai chortazesthe\). Present imperative either middle (direct) or passive. We have \thermainomai\ as a direct middle in strkjv@John:18:18| (were warming themselves) and that makes good sense here: "Warm yourselves." \Chortaz\ was originally used for pasturing cattle, but came to be used of men also as here. "Feed yourselves" (if middle, as is likely). Instead of warm clothes and satisfying food they get only empty words to look out for themselves. {And yet ye give not} (\m dte de\). Third-class condition with \de\ (and yet) and \m\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \didmi\, to give, cold deeds with warm words. {The things needful to the body} (\ta epitdeia tou smatos\). "The necessities of the body" (the necessaries of life). Old adjective from adverb \epitdes\ (enough), only here in N.T. {What doth it profit?} (\ti ophelos;\). As in verse 14| and here the conclusion (apodosis) of the long condition begun in verse 15|.
rwp@James:2:21 @{Justified by works} (\ex ergn edikaith\). First aorist passive indicative of \dikaio\ (see Galatians and Romans for this verb, to declare righteous, to set right) in a question with \ouk\ expecting an affirmative answer. This is the phrase that is often held to be flatly opposed to Paul's statement in strkjv@Romans:4:1-5|, where Paul pointedly says that it was the faith of Abraham (Romans:4:9|) that was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness, not his works. But Paul is talking about the faith of Abraham before his circumcision (4:10|) as the basis of his being set right with God, which faith is symbolized in the circumcision. James makes plain his meaning also. {In that he offered up Isaac his son upon the altar} (\anenegkas Isaak ton huion autou epi to thusiastrion\). They use the same words, but they are talking of different acts. James points to the offering (\anenegkas\ second aorist--with first aorist ending--active participle of \anapher\) of Isaac on the altar (Genesis:22:16f.|) as _proof_ of the faith that Abraham already had. Paul discusses Abraham's faith as the basis of his justification, that and not his circumcision. There is no contradiction at all between James and Paul. Neither is answering the other. Paul may or may not have seen the Epistle of James, who stood by him loyally in the Conference in Jerusalem (Acts:15; strkjv@Galatians:2|).
rwp@James:4:2 @{Ye lust} (\epithumeite\). Present active indicative of \epithume\, old word (from \epi, thumos\, yearning passion for), not necessarily evil as clearly not in strkjv@Luke:22:15| of Christ, but usually so in the N.T., as here. Coveting what a man or nation does not have is the cause of war according to James. {Ye kill and covet} (\phoneuete kai zloute\). Present active indicatives of \phoneu\ (old verb from \phoneus\, murderer) and \zlo\, to desire hotly to possess (1Corinthians:12:31|). It is possible (perhaps probable) that a full stop should come after \phoneuete\ (ye kill) as the result of lusting and not having. Then we have the second situation: "Ye covet and cannot obtain (\epituchein\, second aorist active infinitive of \epitugchan\), and (as a result) ye fight and war." This punctuation makes better sense than any other and is in harmony with verse 1|. Thus also the anticlimax in \phoneuete\ and \zloute\ is avoided. Mayor makes the words a hendiadys, "ye murderously envy." {Ye have not, because ye ask not} (\ouk echete dia to m aiteisthai humas\). James refers again to \ouk echete\ (ye do not have) in verse 2|. Such sinful lusting will not obtain. "Make the service of God your supreme end, and then your desires will be such as God can fulfil in answer to your prayer" (Ropes). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:6:31-33|. The reason here is expressed by \dia\ and the accusative of the articular present middle infinitive of \aite\, used here of prayer to God as in strkjv@Matthew:7:7f|. \Hums\ (you) is the accusative of general reference. Note the middle voice here as in \aiteisthe\ in 3|. Mayor argues that the middle here, in contrast with the active, carries more the spirit of prayer, but Moulton (_Prol_., p. 160) regards the distinction between \aite\ and \aiteomai\ often "an extinct subtlety."
rwp@James:4:4 @{Ye adulteresses} (\moichalides\). \Moichoi kai\ (ye adulterers) is spurious (Syrian text only). The feminine form here is a common late word from the masculine \moichoi\. It is not clear whether the word is to be taken literally here as in strkjv@Romans:7:3|, or figuratively for all unfaithful followers of Christ (like an unfaithful bride), as in strkjv@2Corinthians:11:1f.; strkjv@Ephesians:5:24-28| (the Bride of Christ). Either view makes sense in this context, probably the literal view being more in harmony with the language of verses 2f|. In that case James may include more than Christians in his view, though Paul talks plainly to church members about unchastity (Ephesians:5:3-5|). {Enmity with God} (\echthra tou theou\). Objective genitive \theou\ with \echthra\ (predicate and so without article), old word from \echthros\, enemy (Romans:5:10|), with \eis theon\ (below and strkjv@Romans:8:7|). {Whosoever therefore would be} (\hos ean oun boulthi\). Indefinite relative clause with \hos\ and modal \ean\ and the first aorist passive (deponent) subjunctive of \boulomai\, to will (purpose). {A friend of the world} (\philos tou kosmou\). Predicate nominative with infinitive \einai\ agreeing with \hos\. See strkjv@2:23| for \philos theou\ (friend of God). {Maketh himself} (\kathistatai\). Present passive (not middle) indicative as in strkjv@3:6|, "is constituted," "is rendered." {An enemy of God} (\echthros tou theou\). Predicate nominative and anarthrous and objective genitive (\theou\).
rwp@James:5:3 @{Are rusted} (\katitai\). Perfect passive indicative (singular for \chrusos\ and \arguros\ are grouped as one) of \katio\, late verb (from \ios\, rust) with perfective sense of \kata\, to rust through (down to the bottom), found only here, Sir. strkjv@12:11, Epictetus (_Diss_. 4, 6, 14). {Rust} (\ios\). Poison in strkjv@James:3:8; strkjv@Romans:3:13| (only N.T. examples of old word). Silver does corrode and gold will tarnish. Dioscorides (V.91) tells about gold being rusted by chemicals. Modern chemists can even transmute metals as the alchemists claimed. {For a testimony} (\eis marturion\). Common idiom as in strkjv@Matthew:8:4| (use of \eis\ with accusative in predicate). {Against you} (\humin\). Dative of disadvantage as in strkjv@Mark:6:11| (\eis marturion autois\) where in the parallel passage (Luke:9:5|) we have \eis marturion ep' autous\. "To you" will make sense, as in strkjv@Matthew:8:4; strkjv@10:18|, but "against" is the idea here as in strkjv@Luke:21:13|. {Shall eat} (\phagetai\). Future middle (late form from \ephagon\) of defective verb \esthi\, to eat. {Your flesh} (\tas sarkas\). The plural is used for the fleshy parts of the body like pieces of flesh (Revelation:17:16; strkjv@19:18,21|). Rust eats like a canker, like cancer in the body. {As fire} (\hs pur\). Editors differ here whether to connect this phrase with \phagetai\, just before (as Mayor), for fire eats up more rapidly than rust, or with the following, as Westcott and Hort and Ropes, that is the eternal fire of Gehenna which awaits them (Matthew:25:41; strkjv@Mark:9:44|). This interpretation makes a more vivid picture for \ethsaurisate\ (ye have laid up, first aorist active indicative of \thsauriz\, strkjv@Matthew:6:19| and see strkjv@Proverbs:16:27|), but it is more natural to take it with \phagetai\.
rwp@James:5:15 @{The prayer of faith} (\h euch ts pistes\). Cf. strkjv@1:6| for prayer marked by faith. {Shall save} (\ssei\). Future active of \sz\, to make well. As in strkjv@Matthew:9:21f.; strkjv@Mark:6:56|. No reference here to salvation of the soul. The medicine does not heal the sick, but it helps nature (God) do it. The doctor cooperates with God in nature. {The sick} (\ton kamnonta\). Present active articular participle of \kamn\, old verb, to grow weary (Hebrews:12:3|), to be sick (here), only N.T. examples. {The Lord shall raise him up} (\egerei auton ho kurios\). Future active of \egeir\. Precious promise, but not for a professional "faith-healer" who scoffs at medicine and makes merchandise out of prayer. {And if he have committed sins} (\kan hamartias i pepoiks\). Periphrastic perfect active subjunctive (unusual idiom) with \kai ean\ (crasis \kan\) in condition of third class. Supposing that he has committed sins as many sick people have (Mark:2:5ff.; strkjv@John:5:14; strkjv@9:2f.; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:30|). {It shall be forgiven him} (\aphethsetai auti\). Future passive of \aphimi\ (impersonal passive as in strkjv@Matthew:7:2,7; strkjv@Romans:10:10|). Not in any magical way, not because his sickness has been healed, not without change of heart and turning to God through Christ. Much is assumed here that is not expressed.
rwp@Info_John @ NO EARLY MARTYRDOM FOR THE APOSTLE JOHN In 1862 a fragment of the Chronicle of Georgius Hamartolus, a Byzantine monk of the ninth century, was published. It is the _Codex Coislinianus_, Paris, 305, which differs from the other manuscripts of this author in saying that John according to Papias was slain by the Jews (\hupo Ioudain anireth\) while the other manuscripts say that John rested in peace (\en eirni anepausato\). The passage also quotes Eusebius to the effect that John received Asia as his sphere of work and lived and died in Ephesus. This same George the Sinner misquotes Origen about the death of John for Origen really says that the Roman king condemned him to the Isle of Patmos, not to death. Another fragment of Philip of Side, apparently used by Georgius, makes the same erroneous reference to Papias. It is therefore a worthless legend growing out of the martyrdom promised James and John by Jesus (Mark:10:39; strkjv@Matthew:20:23|) and realized by James first of all (Acts:12:1f.|). John drank the cup in the exile to Patmos. The correction to Peter in strkjv@John:21:20-23| would have no meaning if the Apostle John had already been put to death.
rwp@Info_John @ HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL It is just here that the chief attack is made on the Fourth Gospel even by some who admit the Johannine authorship. It is now assumed by some that the Fourth Gospel is not on a par with the Synoptics in historical reliability and some harmonies omit it entirely or place it separately at the close, though certainly Tatian used it with the Synoptics in his _Diatessaron_, the first harmony of the Gospels. Some even follow Schmiedel in seeing only a symbolic or parabolic character in the miracles in the Fourth Gospel, particularly in the narrative of the raising of Lazarus in chapter strkjv@John:11| which occurs here alone. But John makes this miracle play quite an important part in the culmination of events at the end. Clearly the author professes to be giving actual data largely out of his own experience and knowledge. It is objected by some that the Fourth Gospel gives an unnatural picture of Christ with Messianic claims at the very start. But the Synoptics give that same claim at the baptism and temptation, not to mention Luke's account of the Boy Jesus in the temple. The picture of the Jews as hostile to Jesus is said to be overdrawn in the Fourth Gospel. The answer to that appears in the Sermon on the Mount, the Sabbath miracles, the efforts of the Pharisees and lawyers to catch Jesus in his talk, the final denunciation in strkjv@Matthew:23|, all in the Synoptics. The opposition to Jesus grew steadily as he revealed himself more clearly. Some of the difficulties raised are gratuitous as in the early cleansing of the temple as if it could not have happened twice, confounding the draught of fishes in chapter strkjv@John:21| with that in strkjv@Luke:5|, making Mary of Bethany at the feast of a Simon in chapter strkjv@John:12| the same as the sinful woman at the feast of another Simon in strkjv@Luke:7|, making John's Gospel locate the last passover meal a day ahead instead of at the regular time as the Synoptics have it. Rightly interpreted these difficulties disappear. In simple truth, if one takes the Fourth Gospel at its face value, the personal recollections of the aged John phrased in his own way to supplement the narratives in the Synoptics, there is little left to give serious trouble. The Jerusalem ministry with the feasts is a case in point. The narrative of the call of the first disciples in chapter strkjv@John:1| is another. The author followed Simon in bringing also his own brother James to Jesus. John was present in the appearance of Christ before Annas, and Pilate. He was at the Cross when no other apostles were there. He took the mother of Jesus to his home and then returned to the Cross. He saw the piercing of the side of Jesus. He knew and saw the deed of Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. E. H. Askwith has a most helpful discussion of this whole problem in _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910).
rwp@John:1:4 @{In him was life} (\en auti z n\). That which has come into being (verse 3|) in the Logos was life. The power that creates and sustains life in the universe is the Logos. This is what Paul means by the perfect passive verb \ektistai\ (stands created) in strkjv@Colossians:1:16|. This is also the claim of Jesus to Martha (John:11:25|). This is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:1:3| "bearing (upholding) the all things by the word of his power." Once this language might have been termed unscientific, but not so now after the spiritual interpretation of the physical world by Eddington and Jeans. Usually in John \z\ means spiritual life, but here the term is unlimited and includes all life; only it is not \bios\ (manner of life), but the very principle or essence of life. That is spiritual behind the physical and to this great scientists today agree. It is also personal intelligence and power. Some of the western documents have \estin\ here instead of \n\ to bring out clearly the timelessness of this phrase of the work of the \Logos\. {And the life was the light of men} (\kai h z n to phs tn anthrpn\). Here the article with both \z\ and \phs\ makes them interchangeable. "The light was the life of men" is also true. That statement is curiously like the view of some physicists who find in electricity (both light and power) the nearest equivalent to life in its ultimate physical form. Later Jesus will call himself the light of the world (John:8:12|). John is fond of these words life and light in Gospel, Epistles, Revelation. He here combines them to picture his conception of the Pre-incarnate Logos in his relation to the race. He was and is the Life of men (\tn anthrpon\, generic use of the article) and the Light of men. John asserts this relation of the Logos to the race of men in particular before the Incarnation.
rwp@John:1:9 @{There was} (\n\). Imperfect indicative. Emphatic position at the beginning of the sentence and so probably not periphrastic conjugation with \erchomenon\ (coming) near the end, though that is possible. {The true light} (\to phs to althinon\). "The light the genuine," not a false light of wreckers of ships, but the dependable light that guides to the harbor of safety. This true light had been on hand all the time in the darkness (\n\ imperfect, linear action) before John came. {Even the light} (not in the Greek). Added in the English to make plain this interpretation. {Lighteth every man} (\phtizei panta anthrpon\). Old verb (from \phs\) to give light as in strkjv@Revelation:22:5; strkjv@Luke:11:35f|. The Quakers appeal to this phrase for their belief that to every man there is given an inner light that is a sufficient guide, the Quaker's text it is called. But it may only mean that all the real light that men receive comes from Christ, not necessarily that each one receives a special revelation. {Coming} (\erchomenon\). This present middle participle of \erchomai\ can be taken with \anthrpon\ just before (accusative masculine singular), "every man as he comes into the world." It can also be construed with \phs\ (nominative neuter singular). This idea occurs in strkjv@John:3:19; strkjv@11:27; strkjv@12:46|. In the two last passages the phrase is used of the Messiah which makes it probable here. But even so the light presented in strkjv@11:27; strkjv@12:46| is that of the Incarnate Messiah, not the Pre-incarnate Logos. Here \kosmos\ rather than \panta\ occurs in the sense of the orderly universe as often in this Gospel. See strkjv@Ephesians:1:4|.
rwp@John:1:15 @{Beareth witness} (\marturei\). Historical (dramatic) present indicative of this characteristic word in John (cf. strkjv@1:17f.|). See strkjv@1:32,34| for historical examples of John's witness to Christ. This sentence is a parenthesis in Westcott and Hort's text, though the Revised Version makes a parenthesis of most of verse 14|. The witness of John is adduced in proof of the glory full of grace and truth already claimed for the Incarnate Logos. {Crieth} (\kekragen\). Second perfect active indicative of \kraz\, old verb for loud crying, repeated in dramatic form again for emphasis recalling the wonderful Voice in the wilderness which the Beloved Disciple can still hear echoing through the years. {This was} (\houtos n\). Imperfect indicative where John throws the tense back in past time when he looked forward to the coming of the Messiah as in strkjv@Acts:3:10| where we should prefer "is" (\estin\). Gildersleeve (_Syntax_, p. 96) calls this the "imperfect of sudden appreciation of the real state of things." {Of whom I said} (\hon eipon\). But B C and a corrector of Aleph (Westcott and Hort) have \ho eipn\ "the one who said," a parenthetical explanation about the Baptist, not the words of the Baptist about Christ. {After me} (\opis mou\). See also strkjv@1:27|. Later in time John means. He described "the Coming One" (\ho erchomenos\) before he saw Jesus. The language of John here is precisely that in strkjv@Matthew:3:11| \ho opis mou erchomenos\ (cf. strkjv@Mark:1:7|). The Beloved Disciple had heard the Baptist say these very words, but he also had the Synoptic Gospels. {Is become} (\gegonen\). Second perfect active indicative of \ginomai\. It is already an actual fact when the Baptist is speaking. {Before me} (\emprosthen mou\). In rank and dignity, the Baptist means, \ho ischuroteros mou\ "the one mightier than I" (Mark:1:7|) and \ischuroteros mou\ "mightier than I" (Matthew:3:11|). In strkjv@John:3:28| \emprosthen ekeinou\ (before him, the Christ) does mean priority in time, but not here. This superior dignity of the Messiah John proudly recognizes always (John:3:25-30|). {For he was before me} (\hoti prtos mou n\). Paradox, but clear. He had always been (\n imperfect\) before John in his Pre-incarnate state, but "after" John in time of the Incarnation, but always ahead of John in rank immediately on his Incarnation. \Prtos mou\ (superlative with ablative) occurs here when only two are compared as is common in the vernacular _Koin_. Songs:the Beloved Disciple came first (\prtos\) to the tomb, ahead of Peter (20:4|). Songs:also \prton humn\ in strkjv@15:18| means "before you" as if it were \proteron humn\. Verse 30| repeats these words almost exactly.
rwp@John:1:42 @{Looked upon him} (\emblepsas auti\). See verse 36| for same word and form of John's eager gaze at Jesus. Luke uses this word of Jesus when Peter denied him (Luke:22:61|). {He brought him} (\gagen auton\). Effective second aorist active indicative of \ago\ as if Andrew had to overcome some resistance on Simon's part. {Thou shalt be called Cephas} (\su klthsi Kphs\). Apparently before Simon spoke. We do not know whether Jesus had seen Simon before or not, but he at once gives him a nickname that will characterize him some day, though not yet, when he makes the noble confession (Matthew:16:17f.|), and Jesus will say, "Thou art Peter." Here the future passive indicative of \kale\ is only prophecy. The Aramaic \Cphs\ (rock) is only applied to Simon in John except by Paul (1Corinthians:1:12; strkjv@Galatians:1:18|, etc.). But the Greek \Petros\ is used by all. In the ancient Greek \petra\ was used for the massive ledge of rock like Stone Mountain while \petros\ was a detached fragment of the ledge, though itself large. This distinction may exist in strkjv@Matthew:16:17f.|, except that Jesus probably used Aramaic which would not have such a distinction.
rwp@John:1:50 @{Answered and said} (\apekrith kai eipen\). This redundant use of both verbs (cf. strkjv@1:26|) occurs in the Synoptics also and in the LXX also. It is Aramaic also and vernacular. It is not proof of an Aramaic original as Burney argues (_Aramaic Origin_, etc., p. 53). {Because} (\hoti\). Causal use of \hoti\ at beginning of the sentence as in strkjv@14:19; strkjv@15:19; strkjv@16:6|. The second \hoti\ before \eidon\ (I saw) is either declarative (that) or merely recitative (either makes sense here). {Thou shalt see greater things than these} (\meiz toutn opsi\). Perhaps volitive future middle indicative of \hora\ (though merely futuristic is possible as with \opsesthe\ in 51|) ablative case of \toutn\ after the comparative adjective \meiz\. The wonder of Nathanael no doubt grew as Jesus went on.
rwp@John:3:20 @{That doeth ill} (\ho phaula prassn\). The word \phaulos\ means first worthless and then wicked (usually so in N.T.) and both senses occur in the papyri. In strkjv@5:29| see contrast between \agatha poie\ (doing good things) and \phaula prass\ (practising evil things). {Hateth the light} (\misei to phs\). Hence talks against it, ridicules Christ, Christianity, churches, preachers, etc. Does it in talk, magazines, books, in a supercilious tone of sheer ignorance. {Cometh not to the light} (\ouk erchetai pros to phs\). The light hurts his eyes, reveals his own wickedness, makes him thoroughly uncomfortable. Hence he does not read the Bible, he does not come to church, he does not pray. He goes on in deeper darkness. {Lest his works should be reproved} (\hina m elegchthi ta erga autou\). Negative final clause (\hina m\) with first aorist passive subjunctive of \elegch\, old word to correct a fault, to reprove, to convict. See also strkjv@8:46; strkjv@16:8|. To escape this unpleasant process the evil man cuts out Christ.
rwp@John:3:35 @{Hath given all things into his hand} (\panta dedken en ti cheiri autou\). John makes the same statement about Jesus in strkjv@13:3| (using \eis tas cheiras\ instead of \en ti cheiri\). Jesus makes the same claim in strkjv@5:19-30; strkjv@Matthew:11:27; strkjv@28:18|.
rwp@John:7:30 @{They sought therefore} (\eztoun oun\). Imperfect active of \zte\, inchoative or conative, they began to seek. Either makes sense. The subject is naturally some of the Jerusalemites (Westcott) rather than some of the leaders (Bernard). {To take him} (\auton piasai\). First aorist active infinitive, Doric form from \piaz\, from the usual \piez\, occasionally so in the papyri, but \piaz\ always in N.T. except strkjv@Luke:6:38|. {And} (\kai\). Here = "but." {Laid his hand} (\epebalen tn cheira\). Second aorist active indicative of \epiball\, to cast upon. Old and common idiom for arresting one to make him a prisoner (Matthew:26:50|). See repetition in verse 44|. {His hour} (\h hra autou\). In strkjv@13:1| we read that "the hour" had come, but that was "not yet" (\oup\). "John is at pains to point out at every point that the persecution and death of Jesus followed a predestined course" (Bernard), as in strkjv@2:4; strkjv@7:6,8; strkjv@8:10; strkjv@10:39; strkjv@13:1|, etc. {Was not yet come} (\oup elluthei\). Past perfect active of \erchomai\, as John looks back on the story.
rwp@John:8:11 @{No man, Lord} (\Oudeis, Kurie\). "No one, Sir." She makes no excuse for her sin. Does she recognize Jesus as "Lord"? {Neither do I condemn thee} (\Oude eg se katakrin\). Jesus does not condone her sin. See strkjv@8:15| for "I do not judge (condemn) any one." But he does give the poor woman another chance. {Henceforth sin no more} (\apo tou nun mketi hamartane\). See also strkjv@5:14| where this same language is used to the impotent man. It literally means (prohibition with present active imperative): "Henceforth no longer go on sinning." One can only hope that the woman was really changed in heart and life. Jesus clearly felt that even a wicked woman can be saved.
rwp@John:8:28 @{When ye have lifted up the Son of man} (\hotan hupsste ton huion tou anthrpou\). Indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ (\hote + an\) and the first aorist active subjunctive of \hupso\, to lift up (_Koin_ verb from \hupsos\, height), used several times in John of the Cross of Christ (3:14; strkjv@8:28; strkjv@12:32,34|). It is unnecessary to render the aorist subjunctive as if a future perfect, simply "whenever ye lift up" (actually lift up, ingressive aorist). In strkjv@Acts:2:33| the verb is used of the Ascension. {Shall ye know} (\gnsesthe\). Future (ingressive aoristic) middle of \ginsk\. _Cognoscetis ex re quod nunc ex verbo non creditis_ (Bengel). But the knowledge from the facts like the fall of Jerusalem will come too late and will not bring a change of heart. The Holy Spirit will convict them concerning judgment (16:8|). For {I am} (\eg eimi\) see on verse ¯24|. {As the Father taught me} (\Kaths edidasken me ho patr\). This claim Jesus repeats (see verse 26|) and clearly makes on his arrival at the feast (7:16f.|). This fact marks Jesus off from the rabbis.
rwp@John:8:39 @{Our father is Abraham} (\ho patr hmn Abraam estin\). They saw the implication and tried to counter it by repeating their claim in verse 33| which was true so far as physical descent went as Jesus had admitted (verse 37|). {If ye were} (\ei este\). Strictly, "if ye are" as ye claim, a condition of the first class assumed to be true. {Ye would do} (\epoieite an\). Read by C L N and a corrector of Aleph while W omits \an\. This makes a mixed condition (protasis of the first class, apodosis of the second. See Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1022). But B reads \poieite\ like the Sin. Syriac which has to be treated as imperative (so Westcott and Hort).
rwp@John:10:17 @{For this reason} (\dia touto\). Points to the following \hoti\ clause. The Father's love for the Son is drawn out (John:3:16|) by the voluntary offering of the Son for the sin of the world (Romans:5:8|). Hence the greater exaltation (Phillipians:2:9|). Jesus does for us what any good shepherd does (10:11|) as he has already said (10:15|). The value of the atoning death of Christ lies in the fact that he is the Son of God, the Son of Man, free of sin, and that he makes the offering voluntarily (Hebrews:9:14|). {That I may take it again} (\hina palin lab autn\). Purpose clause with \hina\ and second aorist active subjunctive of \lamban\. He looked beyond his death on the Cross to the resurrection. "The purpose of the Passion was not merely to exhibit his unselfish love; it was in order that He might resume His life, now enriched with quickening power as never before" (Bernard). The Father raised Jesus from the dead (Acts:2:32|). There is spontaneity in the surrender to death and in the taking life back again (Dods).
rwp@John:10:24 @{Came round about him} (\ekuklsan auton\). Aorist active indicative of \kuklo\, old verb from \kuklos\ (cycle, circle). See strkjv@Acts:14:20| for the circle of disciples around Paul when stoned. Evidently the hostile Jews cherished the memory of the stinging rebuke given them by Jesus when here last, particularly the allegory of the Good Shepherd (10:1-19|), in which he drew so sharply their own picture. {How long dost thou hold us in suspense?} (\hes pote tn psuchn hmn aireis;\). Literally, "Until when dost thou lift up our soul?" But what do they mean by this metaphor? \Air\ is common enough to lift up the eyes (John:11:41|), the voice (Luke:17:13|), and in strkjv@Psalms:25:1; strkjv@86:4| (Josephus, _Ant_. III. ii. 3) we have "to lift up the soul." We are left to the context to judge the precise meaning. Clearly the Jews mean to imply doubt and suspense. The next remark makes it clear. {If thou art the Christ} (\ei su ei ho Christos\). Condition of first class assumed to be true for the sake of argument. {Tell us plainly} (\eipon hmin parrsii\). Conclusion with \eipon\ rather than the usual \eipe\ as if first aorist active imperative like \luson\. The point is in "plainly" (\parrsii\), adverb as in strkjv@7:13,26| which see. That is to say "I am the Christ" in so many words. See strkjv@11:14; strkjv@16:29| for the same use of \parrsii\. The demand seemed fair enough on the surface. They had made it before when here at the feast of tabernacles (8:25|). Jesus declined to use the word \Christos\ (Messiah) then as now because of the political bearing of the word in their minds. The populace in Galilee had once tried to make him king in opposition to Pilate (John:6:14f.|). When Jesus does confess on oath before Caiaphas that he is the Christ the Son of God (Mark:14:61f.; strkjv@Matthew:26:63f.|), the Sanhedrin instantly vote him guilty of blasphemy and then bring him to Pilate with the charge of claiming to be king as a rival to Caesar. Jesus knew their minds too well to be caught now.
rwp@John:10:33 @{For a good work we stone thee not} (\peri kalou ergou ou lithazomen\). "Concerning a good deed we are not stoning thee." Flat denial that the healing of the blind man on the Sabbath had led them to this attempt (8:59|) in spite of the facts. {But for blasphemy} (\alla peri blasphmias\). See strkjv@Acts:26:7| where \peri\ with the genitive is also used with \egkaloumai\ for the charge against Paul. This is the only example in John of the word \blasphmia\ (cf. strkjv@Matthew:12:31|). {And because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God} (\kai hoti su anthrpos n poieis seauton theon\). In strkjv@5:18| they stated the charge more accurately: "He called God his own Father, making himself equal with God." That is, he made himself the Son of God. This he did beyond a doubt. But was it blasphemy? Only if he was not the Son of God. The penalty for blasphemy was death by stoning (Leviticus:24:16; strkjv@1Kings:21:10,13|).
rwp@John:12:6 @{Not because he cared for the poor} (\ouch hoti peri tn ptchn emelen auti\). Literally, "not because it was a care to him concerning the poor" (impersonal imperfect of \melei\, it was a care). John often makes explanatory comments of this kind as in strkjv@2:21f.; strkjv@7:22,39|. {But because he was a thief} (\alle hoti klepts n\). Clearly the disciples did not know then that Judas was a petty thief. That knowledge came later after he took the bribe of thirty pieces of silver for betraying Jesus (Matthew:26:15|), for the disciples did not suspect Judas of treachery (13:28f.|), let alone small peculations. There is no reason for thinking that John is unfair to Judas. "Temptation commonly comes through that for which we are naturally fitted" (Westcott). In this case Judas himself was "the poor beggar" who wanted this money. {And having the bag took away what was put therein} (\kai to glssokomon echn ta ballomena ebastazen\). This is the correct text. This compound for the earlier \glssokomeion\ (from \glssa\, tongue, and \kome\, to tend) was originally a receptacle for the tongues or mouth-pieces of wind instruments. The shorter form is already in the Doric inscriptions and is common in the papyri for "money-box" as here. It occurs also in Josephus, Plutarch, etc. In N.T. only here and strkjv@13:29| in same sense about Judas. \Ballomena\ is present passive participle (repeatedly put in) of \ball\, to cast or fling. The imperfect active (custom) of \bastaz\, old verb to pick up (John:10:31|), to carry (19:17|), but here and strkjv@20:15| with the sense to bear away as in Polybius, Josephus, Diogenes Laertes, and often so in the papyri.
rwp@John:12:7 @{Suffer her to keep it against the day of my burying} (\Aphes autn, hina eis tn hmeran tou entaphiasmou mou trsi auto\). This reading (\hina trsi\, purpose clause with \hina\ and first aorist active subjunctive of \tre\) rather than that of the Textus Receptus (just \tetreken\, perfect active indicative) is correct. It is supported by Aleph B D L W Theta. The \hina\ can be rendered as above after \aphes\ according to _Koin_ idiom or more probably: "Let her alone: it was that," etc. (supplying "it was"). Either makes good sense. The word \entaphiasmos\ is a later and rare substantive from the late verb \entaphiaz\, to prepare for burial (Matthew:26:12; strkjv@John:19:40|), and means preparation for burial. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:14:8|. "Preparation for my burial" is the idea here and in Mark. The idea of Jesus is that Mary had saved this money to use in preparing his body for burial. She is giving him the flowers before the funeral. We can hardly take it that Mary did not use all of the ointment for Mark (Mark:14:3|) says that she broke it and yet he adds (Mark:14:8|) what John has here. It is a paradox, but Jesus is fond of paradoxes. Mary has kept this precious gift by giving it now beforehand as a preparation for my burial. We really keep what we give to Christ. This is Mary's glory that she had some glimmering comprehension of Christ's death which none of the disciples possessed.
rwp@John:14:28 @{I go away, and I come} (\hupag kai erchomai\), both futuristic presents (7:33; strkjv@14:3,18|). {If ye loved me} (\ei gapte me\). Second-class condition with the imperfect active of \agapa\ referring to present time, implying that the disciples are not loving Jesus as they should. {Ye would have rejoiced} (\echarte an\). Second aorist passive indicative of \chair\ with \an\, conclusion of second-class condition referring to past time, "Ye would already have rejoiced before this" at Christ's going to the Father (verse 12|). {Greater than I} (\meizn mou\). Ablative case \mou\ after the comparative \meizn\ (from positive \megas\). The filial relation makes this necessary. Not a distinction in nature or essence (cf. strkjv@10:30|), but in rank in the Trinity. No Arianism or Unitarianism here. The very explanation here is proof of the deity of the Son (Dods).
rwp@John:15:22 @{They had not had sin} (\hamartian ouk eichosan\). Conclusion of condition of second class without \an\ because context makes it clear (\nun de\) without it (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1013). The imperfect active indicative with \-osan\ instead of \-on\ (also in verse 24|) as common in the LXX, and occurs in the papyri and the inscriptions and the Boeotian dialect. {Excuse} (\prophasin\). Old word (1Thessalonians:2:5|) either from \prophain\, to show forth, or \prophmi\, to speak forth. Mere pretence, in John only here and verse 24|.
rwp@John:16:23 @{Ye shall ask me nothing} (\eme ouk ertsete\). Either in the sense of question (original meaning of \erta\) as in verses 19,30| since he will be gone or in the sense of request or favours (like \aite\ in this verse) as in strkjv@14:16; strkjv@Acts:3:2|. In verse 26| both \aite\ and \erta\ occur in this sense. Either view makes sense here. {If ye shall ask} (\an ti aitste\). Third-class condition, \an\ like \ean\ with first aorist active subjunctive of \aite\. Note ¯14:26| for "in my name."
rwp@John:19:11 @{Thou wouldest have} (\ouk eiches\). Imperfect active indicative without \an\, but apodosis of second-class condition as in strkjv@15:22,24|. {Except it were given thee} (\ei m n dedomenon\). Periphrastic past perfect indicative of \didmi\ (a permanent possession). {From above} (\anthen\). From God (cf. strkjv@3:3|), the same doctrine of government stated by Paul in strkjv@Romans:13:1f|. Pilate did not get his "authority" from the Sanhedrin, but from Caesar. Jesus makes God the source of all real "authority." {Hath greater sin} (\meizona hamartian echei\). The same idiom in strkjv@9:41|. Caiaphas has his authority from God also and has used Pilate for his own base end.
rwp@John:21:15 @{Lovest thou me more than these?} (\agapis me pleon toutn;\). Ablative case of comparison \toutn\ (disciples) after \pleon\. Peter had even boasted that he would stand by Christ though all men forsook him (Mark:14:29|). We do not know what passed between Jesus and Peter when Jesus first appeared to him (Luke:24:34|). But here Christ probes the inmost recesses of Peter's heart to secure the humility necessary for service. {I love thee} (\phil su\). Peter makes no claim here to superior love and passes by the "more than these" and does not even use Christ's word \agapa\ for high and devoted love, but the humbler word \phile\ for love as a friend. He insists that Christ knows this in spite of his conduct. {Feed my lambs} (\Boske ta arnia mou\). For the old word \bosk\ (to feed as a herdsman) see strkjv@Matthew:8:33|. Present active imperative here. \Arnia\ is a diminutive of \arnos\ (lamb).
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@Luke:1:35 @{Shall overshadow thee} (\episkiasei\). A figure of a cloud coming upon her. Common in ancient Greek in the sense of obscuring and with accusative as of Peter's shadow in strkjv@Acts:5:15|. But we have seen it used of the shining bright cloud at the Transfiguration of Jesus (Matthew:17:5; strkjv@Mark:9:7; strkjv@Luke:9:34|). Here it is like the Shekinah glory which suggests it (Exodus:40:38|) where the cloud of glory represents the presence and power of God. {Holy, the Son of God} (\Hagion huios theou\). Here again the absence of the article makes it possible for it to mean "Son of God." See strkjv@Matthew:5:9|. But this title, like the Son of Man (\Hosea:huios tou anthrpou\) was a recognized designation of the Messiah. Jesus did not often call himself Son of God (Matthew:27:43|), but it is assumed in his frequent use of the Father, the Son (Matthew:11:27; strkjv@Luke:10:21; strkjv@John:5:19ff.|). It is the title used by the Father at the baptism (Luke:3:22|) and on the Mount of Transfiguration (Luke:9:35|). The wonder of Mary would increase at these words. The Miraculous Conception or Virgin Birth of Jesus is thus plainly set forth in Luke as in Matthew. The fact that Luke was a physician gives added interest to his report.
rwp@Luke:1:45 @{For} (\hoti\). It is not certain whether \hoti\ here is "that" or "because." It makes good sense either way. See also strkjv@7:16|. This is the first beatitude in the New Testament and it is similar to the last one in the Gospels spoken to Thomas to discourage his doubt (John:20:29|). Elisabeth wishes Mary to have full faith in the prophecy of the angel. This song of Elisabeth is as real poetry as is that of Mary (1:47-55|) and Zacharias (1:68-70|). All three spoke under the power of the Holy Spirit. These are the first New Testament hymns and they are very beautiful. Plummer notes four strophes in Mary's Magnificat (46-48|,49,50|,51-53|,54,55|). Every idea here occurs in the Old Testament, showing that Mary's mind was full of the spiritual message of God's word.
rwp@Luke:2:14 @{Among men in whom he is well pleased} (\en anthrpois eudokias\). The Textus Receptus (Authorized Version also has \eudokia\, but the genitive \eudokias\ is undoubtedly correct, supported by the oldest and best uncials. (Aleph, A B D W). C has a lacuna here. Plummer justly notes how in this angelic hymn Glory and Peace correspond, in the highest and on earth, to God and among men of goodwill. It would be possible to connect "on earth" with "the highest" and also to have a triple division. There has been much objection raised to the genitive \eudokias\, the correct text. But it makes perfectly good sense and better sense. As a matter of fact real peace on earth exists only among those who are the subjects of God's goodwill, who are characterized by goodwill toward God and man. This word \eudokia\ we have already had in strkjv@Matthew:11:26|. It does not occur in the ancient Greek. The word is confined to Jewish and Christian writings, though the papyri furnish instances of \eudoksis\. Wycliff has it "to men of goodwill."
rwp@Luke:2:36 @{One Anna a prophetess} (\Hanna prophtis\). The word \prophtis\ occurs in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Revelation:2:20|. In old Greek writers it means a woman who interprets oracles. The long parenthesis into verse 37| tells of her great age. Montefiore makes it 106 as she was 15 when married, married 7 years, a widow 84.
rwp@Luke:3:20 @{Added} (\prosethken\). First aorist active indicative (kappa aorist). Common verb (\prostithmi\) in all Greek. In N.T. chiefly in Luke and Acts. Hippocrates used it of applying wet sponges to the head and Galen of applying a decoction of acorns. There is no evidence that Luke has a medical turn to the word here. The absence of the conjunction \hoti\ (that) before the next verb \katekleisen\ (shut up) is asyndeton. This verb literally means {shut down}, possibly with a reference to closing down the door of the dungeon, though it makes sense as a perfective use of the preposition, like our "shut up" without a strict regard to the idea of "down." It is an old and common verb, though here and strkjv@Acts:26:10| only in the N.T. See strkjv@Matthew:14:3| for further statement about the prison.
rwp@Luke:3:23 @{Jesus Himself} (\autos Isous\). Emphatic intensive pronoun calling attention to the personality of Jesus at this juncture. When he entered upon his Messianic work. {When he began to teach} (\archomenos\). The words "to teach" are not in the Greek text. The Authorized Version "began to be about thirty years of age," is an impossible translation. The Revised Version rightly supplies "to teach" (\didaskein\) after the present participle \archomenos\. Either the infinitive or the participle can follow \archomai\, usually the infinitive in the _Koin_. It is not necessary to supply anything (Acts:1:22|). {Was about thirty years of age} (\n hsei etn triakonta\). Tyndale has it right "Jesus was about thirty yere of age when he beganne." Luke does not commit himself definitely to precisely thirty years as the age of Christ. The Levites entered upon full service at that age, but that proves nothing about Jesus. God's prophets enter upon their task when the word of God comes to them. Jesus may have been a few months under or over thirty or a year or two less or more. {Being Son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli} (\n huios hs enomizeto Isph tou Helei\). For the discussion of the genealogy of Jesus see on ¯Matthew:1:1-17|. The two genealogies differ very widely and many theories have been proposed about them. At once one notices that Luke begins with Jesus and goes back to Adam, the Son of God, while Matthew begins with Abraham and comes to "Joseph the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ" (Matthew:1:16|). Matthew employs the word "begot" each time, while Luke has the article \tou\ repeating \huiou\ (Son) except before Joseph. They agree in the mention of Joseph, but Matthew says that "Jacob begat Joseph" while Luke calls "Joseph the son of Heli." There are other differences, but this one makes one pause. Joseph, of course, did not have two fathers. If we understand Luke to be giving the real genealogy of Jesus through Mary, the matter is simple enough. The two genealogies differ from Joseph to David except in the cases of Zorobabel and Salathiel. Luke evidently means to suggest something unusual in his genealogy by the use of the phrase "as was supposed" (\hs enomizeto\). His own narrative in strkjv@Luke:1:26-38| has shown that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. Plummer objects that, if Luke is giving the genealogy of Jesus through Mary, \huios\ must be used in two senses here (son as was supposed of Joseph, and grandson through Mary of Heli). But that is not an unheard of thing. In neither list does Matthew or Luke give a complete genealogy. Just as Matthew uses "begat" for descent, so does Luke employ "son" in the same way for descendant. It was natural for Matthew, writing for Jews, to give the legal genealogy through Joseph, though he took pains to show in strkjv@Matthew:1:16,18-25| that Joseph was not the actual father of Jesus. It was equally natural for Luke, a Greek himself and writing for the whole world, to give the actual genealogy of Jesus through Mary. It is in harmony with Pauline universality (Plummer) that Luke carries the genealogy back to Adam and does not stop with Abraham. It is not clear why Luke adds "the Son of God" after Adam (3:38|). Certainly he does not mean that Jesus is the Son of God only in the sense that Adam is. Possibly he wishes to dispose of the heathen myths about the origin of man and to show that God is the Creator of the whole human race, Father of all men in that sense. No mere animal origin of man is in harmony with this conception.
rwp@Luke:4:6 @{All this authority} (\tn exousian tautn hapasan\). strkjv@Matthew:4:9| has "all these things." Luke's report is more specific. {And the glory of them} (\kai tn doxan autn\). strkjv@Matthew:4:8| has this in the statement of what the devil did, not what he said. {For it hath been delivered unto me} (\hoti emoi paradedotai\). Perfect passive indicative. Satan here claims possession of world power and Jesus does not deny it. It may be due to man's sin and by God's permission. Jesus calls Satan the ruler of this world (John:12:31; strkjv@14:30; strkjv@16:11|). {To whomsoever I will} (\hoi an thel\). Present subjunctive with \an\ in an indefinite relative sentence. This audacious claim, if allowed, makes one wonder whether some of the world rulers are not, consciously or unconsciously, agents of the devil. In several American cities there has been proven a definite compact between the police and the underworld of crime. But the tone of Satan here is one of superiority to Jesus in world power. He offers him a share in it on one condition.
rwp@Luke:4:9 @{Led him} (\gagen\). Aorist active indicative of \ag\. strkjv@Matthew:4:5| has \paralambanei\ (dramatic present). {The wing of the temple} (\to pterugion tou hierou\). See on ¯Matthew:4:5|. It is not easy to determine precisely what it was. {From hence} (\enteuthen\). This Luke adds to the words in Matthew, which see. {To guard thee} (\tou diaphulaxai se\). Not in strkjv@Matthew:4:6| quoted by Satan from strkjv@Psalms:91:11,12|. Satan does not misquote this Psalm, but he misapplies it and makes it mean presumptuous reliance on God. This compound verb is very old, but occurs here alone in the N.T. and that from the LXX. Luke repeats \hoti\ (recitative \hoti\ after \gegraptai\, is written) after this part of the quotation.
rwp@Luke:4:22 @{Bare him witness} (\emarturoun\). Imperfect active, perhaps inchoative. They all began to bear witness that the rumours were not exaggerations (4:14|) as they had supposed, but had foundation in fact if this discourse or its start was a fair sample of his teaching. The verb \marture\ is a very old and common one. It is frequent in Acts, Paul's Epistles, and the Johannine books. The substantive \martur\ is seen in our English \martyr\, one who witnesses even by his death to his faith in Christ. {And wondered} (\kai ethaumazon\). Imperfect active also, perhaps inchoative also. They began to marvel as he proceeded with his address. This verb is an old one and common in the Gospels for the attitude of the people towards Jesus. {At the words of grace} (\epi tois logois ts charitos\). See on ¯Luke:1:30; strkjv@2:52| for this wonderful word \charis\ so full of meaning and so often in the N.T. The genitive case (case of genus or kind) here means that the words that came out of the mouth of Jesus in a steady stream (present tense, \ekporeuomenois\) were marked by fascination and charm. They were "winning words" as the context makes plain, though they were also "gracious" in the Pauline sense of "grace." There is no necessary antithesis in the ideas of graceful and gracious in these words of Jesus. {Is not this Joseph's son?} (\Ouchi huios estin Isph houtos;\). Witness and wonder gave way to bewilderment as they began to explain to themselves the situation. The use of \ouchi\ intensive form of \ouk\ in a question expects the answer "yes." Jesus passed in Nazareth as the son of Joseph as Luke presents him in strkjv@3:23|. He does not stop here to correct this misconception because the truth has been already amply presented in strkjv@1:28-38; strkjv@2:49|. This popular conception of Jesus as the son of Joseph appears also in strkjv@John:1:45|. The puzzle of the people was due to their previous knowledge of Jesus as the carpenter (Mark:6:3|; the carpenter's son, strkjv@Matthew:13:55|). For him now to appear as the Messiah in Nazareth where he had lived and laboured as the carpenter was a phenomenon impossible to credit on sober reflection. Songs:the mood of wonder and praise quickly turned with whispers and nods and even scowls to doubt and hostility, a rapid and radical transformation of emotion in the audience.
rwp@Luke:4:36 @{Amazement came} (\egeneto thambos\). Mark has \ethambthsan\. {They spake together one with another} (\sunelaloun pros alllous\). Imperfect indicative active and the reciprocal pronoun. Mark has simply the infinitive \sunztein\ (question). {For} (\hoti\). We have here an ambiguous \hoti\ as in strkjv@1:45|, which can be either the relative "that" or the casual \hoti\ "because" or "for," as the Revised Version has it. Either makes good sense. Luke adds here \dunamei\ (with power) to Mark's "authority" (\exousian\). {And they come out} (\exerchontai\). Songs:Luke where Mark has "and they obey him" (\kai upakouousin auti\).
rwp@Luke:9:46 @{A reasoning} (\dialogismos\). A dispute. The word is from \dialogizomai\, the verb used in strkjv@Mark:9:33| about this incident. In Luke this dispute follows immediately after the words of Jesus about his death. They were afraid to ask Jesus about that subject, but strkjv@Matthew:18:1| states that they came to Jesus to settle it. {Which of them should be greatest} (\to tis an ei meizn autn\). Note the article with the indirect question, the clause being in the accusative of general reference. The optative with \an\ is here because it was so in the direct question (potential optative with \an\ retained in the indirect). But Luke makes it plain that it was not an abstract problem about greatness in the kingdom of heaven as they put it to Jesus (Matthew:18:1|), but a personal problem in their own group. Rivalries and jealousies had already come and now sharp words. By and by James and John will be bold enough to ask for the first places for themselves in this political kingdom which they expect (Mark:10:35; strkjv@Matthew:20:20|). It is a sad spectacle.
rwp@Luke:9:51 @{When the days were well-nigh come} (\en ti sumplrousthai tas hmeras\). Luke's common idiom \en\ with the articular infinitive, "in the being fulfilled as to the days." This common compound occurs in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Luke:8:23; strkjv@Acts:2:1|. The language here makes it plain that Jesus was fully conscious of the time of his death as near as already stated (Luke:9:22,27,31|). {That he should be received up} (\ts analmpses autou\). Literally, "of his taking up." It is an old word (from Hippocrates on), but here alone in the N.T. It is derived from \analamban\ (the verb used of the Ascension, strkjv@Acts:1:2,11,22; strkjv@1Timothy:3:16|) and refers here to the Ascension of Jesus after His Resurrection. Not only in John's Gospel (John:17:5|) does Jesus reveal a yearning for a return to the Father, but it is in the mind of Christ here as evidently at the Transfiguration (9:31|) and later in strkjv@Luke:12:49f|. {He steadfastly set his face} (\autos to prospon estrisen\). Note emphatic \autos\, {he himself}, with fixedness of purpose in the face of difficulty and danger. This look on Christ's face as he went to his doom is noted later in strkjv@Mark:10:32|. It is a Hebraistic idiom (nine times in Ezekiel), this use of face here, but the verb (effective aorist active) is an old one from \striz\ (from \strigx\, a support), to set fast, to fix. {To go to Jerusalem} (\tou poreuesthai eis Ierousalm\). Genitive infinitive of purpose. Luke three times mentions Christ making his way to Jerusalem (9:51; strkjv@13:22; strkjv@17:11|) and John mentions three journeys to Jerusalem during the later ministry (John:7:10; strkjv@11:17; strkjv@12:1|). It is natural to take these journeys to be the same in each of these Gospels. Luke does not make definite location of each incident and John merely supplements here and there. But in a broad general way they seem to correspond.
rwp@Luke:9:59 @{And he said unto another} (\eipen de pros heteron\). strkjv@Matthew:8:21| omits Christ's "Follow me" (\akolouthei moi\) and makes this man a volunteer instead of responding to the appeal of Jesus. There is no real opposition, of course. In Matthew's account the man is apologetic as in Luke. Plummer calls him "one of the casual disciples" of whom there are always too many. The scribes knew how to give plausible reasons for not being active disciples. {First} (\prton\). One of the problems of life is the relation of duties to each other, which comes first. The burial of one's father was a sacred duty (Genesis:25:9|), but, as in the case of Tobit strkjv@4:3, this scribe's father probably was still alive. What the scribe apparently meant was that he could not leave his father while still alive to follow Jesus around over the country.
rwp@Luke:10:16 @{Rejecteth him that sent me} (\athetei ton aposteilanta me\). These solemn words form a fit close for this discourse to the Seventy. The fate of Chorazin, Bethsaida, Capernaum will befall those who set aside (\a\ privative and \thete\, from \tithmi\) the mission and message of these messengers of Christ. See this verb used in strkjv@7:30| of the attitude of the scribes and Pharisees toward John and Jesus. It is this thought that makes it so grave a responsibility to be co-workers with Christ, high privilege as it is (John:9:4|).
rwp@Luke:10:24 @{Which ye see} (\ha humeis blepete\). The expression of \humeis\ makes "ye" very emphatic in contrast with the prophets and kings of former days.
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:12:39 @{The thief} (\ho klepts\). The change here almost makes a new parable to illustrate the other, the parable of the housebreaking (verses 39,40|) to illustrate the parable of the waiting servants (35-38|). This same language appears in strkjv@Matthew:24:43f|. "The Master returning from a wedding is replaced by a thief whose study it is to come to the house he means to plunder at an unexpected time" (Bruce). The parallel in strkjv@Matthew:24:43-51| with strkjv@Luke:12:39-46| does not have the interruption by Peter. {He would have watched} (\egrgorsen an\). Apodosis of second-class condition, determined as unfulfilled, made plain by use of \an\ with aorist indicative which is not repeated with \ouk aphken\ (first aorist active indicative of \aphimi\, \k\ aorist), though it is sometimes repeated (Matthew:24:43|).
rwp@Luke:13:4 @{The tower in Siloam} (\ho purgos en Silam\). Few sites have been more clearly located than this. Jesus mentions this accident (only in Luke) of his own accord to illustrate still further the responsibility of his hearers. Jesus makes use of public events in both these incidents to teach spiritual lessons. He gives the "moral" to the massacre of the Galilean pilgrims and the "moral" of the catastrophe at Siloam. {Offenders} (\opheiletai\). Literally, {debtors}, not sinners as in verse 2| and as the Authorized Version renders here. See strkjv@7:41; strkjv@11:4; strkjv@Matthew:6:12; strkjv@18:24-34|.
rwp@Luke:13:7 @{The vinedresser} (\ton ampelourgon\). Old word, but here only in the N.T., from \ampelos\, vine, and \ergon\, work. {These three years I come} (\tria et aph' hou erchomai\). Literally, "three years since (from which time) I come." These three years, of course, have nothing to do with the three years of Christ's public ministry. The three years are counted from the time when the fig tree would normally be expected to bear, not from the time of planting. The Jewish nation is meant by this parable of the barren fig tree. In the withering of the barren fig tree later at Jerusalem we see parable changed to object lesson or fact (Mark:11:12-14; strkjv@Matthew:21:18f.|). {Cut it down} (\ekkopson\). "Cut it out," the Greek has it, out of the vineyard, perfective use of \ek\ with the effective aorist active imperative of \kopt\, where we prefer "down." {Why?} (\hina ti\). Ellipsis here of \gentai\ of which \ti\ is subject (Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 739,916). {Also} (\kai\). Besides bearing no fruit. {Doth cumber the ground} (\tn gn katargei\). Makes the ground completely idle, of no use (\kata, arge\, from \argos\, \a\ privative and \ergon\, work). Late verb, here only in the N.T. except in Paul's Epistles.
rwp@Luke:13:24 @{Strive} (\agnizesthe\). Jesus makes short shrift of the question. He includes others (present middle plural of \agnizomai\, common verb, our agonize). Originally it was to contend for a prize in the games. The kindred word \agnia\ occurs of Christ's struggle in Gethsemane (Luke:22:44|). The narrow gate appears also in strkjv@Matthew:7:13|, only there it is an outside gate (\puls\) while here it is the entrance to the house, "the narrow door" (\thuras\).
rwp@Luke:14:13 @{When thou makest a feast} (\hotan dochn poiis\). \Hotan\ and the present subjunctive in an indefinite temporal clause. \Doch\ means reception as in strkjv@Luke:5:29|, late word, only in these two passages in the N.T. Note absence of article with these adjectives in the Greek (poor people, maimed folks, lame people, blind people).
rwp@Luke:15:13 @{Not many days after} (\met' ou pollas hmeras\). Literally, after not many days. Luke is fond of this idiom (7:6; strkjv@Acts:1:5|). {Took his journey} (\apedmsen\). First aorist active indicative of \apodme\ (from \apodmos\, away from home). Common verb. In the N.T. here and strkjv@Matthew:21:33; strkjv@25:14; strkjv@Mark:12:1; strkjv@Luke:20:9|. He burned all his bridges behind him, gathering together all that he had. {Wasted} (\dieskorpisen\). First aorist active indicative of \diaskorpiz\, a somewhat rare verb, the very opposite of "gathered together" (\sunagogn\). More exactly he scattered his property. It is the word used of winnowing grain (Matthew:25:24|). {With riotous living} (\zn asts\). Living dissolutely or profligately. The late adverb \asts\ (only here in the N.T.) from the common adjective \astos\ (\a\ privative and \sz\), one that cannot be saved, one who does not save, a spendthrift, an abandoned man, a profligate, a prodigal. He went the limit of sinful excesses. It makes sense taken actively or passively (_prodigus_ or _perditus_), active probably here.
rwp@Luke:16:27 @{That you send him} (\hina pempsis auton\). As if he had not had a fair warning and opportunity. The Roman Catholics probably justify prayer to saints from this petition from the Rich Man to Abraham, but both are in Hades (the other world). It is to be observed besides, that Abraham makes no effort to communicate with the five brothers. But heavenly recognition is clearly assumed. Dante has a famous description of his visit to the damned (_Purg_. iii, 114).
rwp@Luke:17:6 @{If ye have} (\ei echete\). Condition of the first class, assumed to be true. {Ye would say} (\elegete an\). Imperfect active with \an\ and so a conclusion (apodosis) of the second class, determined as unfulfilled, a mixed condition therefore. {Sycamine tree} (\sukamini\). At the present time both the black mulberry (sycamine) and the white mulberry (sycamore) exist in Palestine. Luke alone in the N.T. uses either word, the sycamine here, the sycamore in strkjv@19:4|. The distinction is not observed in the LXX, but it is observed in the late Greek medical writers for both trees have medicinal properties. Hence it may be assumed that Luke, as a physician, makes the distinction. Both trees differ from the English sycamore. In strkjv@Matthew:17:20| we have "mountain" in place of "sycamine tree." {Be thou rooted up} (\ekrizthti\). First aorist passive imperative as is \phuteuthti\. {Would have obeyed} (\hupkousen an\). First aorist active indicative with \an\, apodosis of a second-class condition (note aorist tense here, imperfect \elegete\).
rwp@Luke:18:17 @{As a little child} (\hs paidion\). Jesus makes the child the model for those who seek entrance into the kingdom of God, not the adult the model for the child. He does not say that the child is already in the kingdom without coming to him. Jesus has made the child's world by understanding the child and opening the door for him.
rwp@Luke:18:31 @{Took unto him} (\paralabn\). Second aorist active participle of \paralamban\. Taking along with himself. Songs:Mark:10:32|. strkjv@Matthew:20:17| adds \kat' idian\ (apart). Jesus is making a special point of explaining his death to the Twelve. {We go up} (\anabainomen\). Present active indicative, we are going up. {Unto the Son of man} (\ti huii tou anthrpou\). Dative case of personal interest. The position is amphibolous and the construction makes sense either with "shall be accomplished" (\telesthsetai\) or "that are written" (\ta gegrammena\), probably the former. Compare these minute details of the prophecy here (verses 32f.|) with the words in strkjv@Mark:10:33f.; strkjv@Matthew:20:18f.|, which see.
rwp@Luke:19:13 @{Trade ye herewith till I come} (\pragmateusasthe en hi erchomai\). First aorist middle imperative of \pragmateuomai\, an old verb from \prgma\, business. Here only in the N.T. Westcott and Hort in their text read \pragmateusasthai\, first aorist middle infinitive (\-ai\ and \-e\ were pronounced alike). The infinitive makes it indirect discourse, the imperative direct. {While I am coming} is what \en hi erchomai\ really means.
rwp@Luke:20:41 @{How say they?} (\Ps legousin;\). The Pharisees had rallied in glee and one of their number, a lawyer, had made a feeble contribution to the controversy which resulted in his agreement with Jesus and in praise from Jesus (Mark:12:28-34; strkjv@Matthew:27:34-40|). Luke does not give this incident which makes it plain that by "they say" (\legousin\) Jesus refers to the Pharisees (rabbis, lawyers), carrying on the discussion and turning the tables on them while the Pharisees are still gathered together (Matthew:22:41|). The construction with \legousin\ is the usual infinitive and the accusative in indirect discourse. By "the Christ" (\ton Christon\) "the Messiah" is meant.
rwp@Luke:21:16 @{Shall they cause to be put to death} (\thanatsousin\). Future active of \thanato\, to put to death or to make to die (causative). Either makes sense here. Old and common verb.
rwp@Luke:22:8 @{Peter and John} (\Petron kai Iann\). strkjv@Mark:14:13| has only "two" while strkjv@Matthew:26:17| makes the disciples take the initiative. The word passover in this context is used either of the meal, the feast day, the whole period (including the unleavened bread). "Eat the passover" can refer to the meal as here or to the whole period of celebration (John:18:28|).
rwp@Luke:22:22 @{As it hath been determined} (\kata to hrismenon\). Perfect passive participle of \horiz\, to limit or define, mark off the border, our "horizon." But this fact does not absolve Judas of his guilt as the "woe" here makes plain.
rwp@Luke:22:53 @{But this is your hour} (\all' haut estin humn h hra\). Songs:Jesus surrenders. The moral value of his atoning sacrifice on the Cross consists in the voluntariness of his death. He makes it clear that they have taken undue advantage of him in this hour of secret prayer and had failed to seize him in public in the temple. But "the power of darkness" (\h exousia tou skotous\), had its turn. A better day will come. The might, authority of darkness.
rwp@Luke:22:58 @{After a little while another} (\meta brachu heteros\). strkjv@Matthew:26:71| makes it after Peter had gone out into the porch and mentions a maid as speaking as does strkjv@Mark:14:69|, while here the "other" (\heteros\) is a man (masculine gender). It is almost impossible to co-ordinate the three denials in the four accounts unless we conceive of several joining in when one led off. This time Peter's denial is very blunt, "I am not."
rwp@Luke:22:59 @{After the space of about one hour} (\diastass hsei hras mias\). Genitive absolute with second aorist active participle feminine singular of \diistmi\. This classical verb in the N.T. is used only by Luke (22:59; strkjv@24:51; strkjv@Acts:27:28|). It means standing in two or apart, about an hour intervening. {Confidently affirmed} (\diischurizeto\). Imperfect middle, he kept affirming strongly. An old verb (\dia, ischurizomai\), to make oneself strong, to make emphatic declaration. In the N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:12:15|. {For he is a Galilean} (\kai gar Galilaios estin\). strkjv@Matthew:26:73| makes it plain that it was his speech that gave him away, which see.
rwp@Luke:22:69 @{The Son of man} (\ho huios tou anthrpou\). Jesus really answers their demand about "the Messiah" by asserting that he is "the Son of man" and they so understand him. He makes claims of equality with God also which they take up.
rwp@Mark:1:16 @{And passing along by the Sea of Galilee} (\kai paragn para tn thalassan ts Galilaias\). Mark uses \para\ (along, beside) twice and makes the picture realistic. He catches this glimpse of Christ in action. Casting a {net} (\amphiballontas\). Literally casting on both sides, now on one side, now on the other. Matthew (Matthew:4:18|) has a different phrase which see. There are two papyri examples of the verb \amphiball\, one verb absolutely for fishing as here, the other with the accusative. It is fishing with a net, making a cast, a haul. These four disciples were fishermen (\halieis\) and were {partners} (\metochoi\) as Luke states (Luke:5:7|).
rwp@Mark:1:22 @{They were astonished} (\exeplssonto\). Pictorial imperfect as in strkjv@Luke:4:32| describing the amazement of the audience, "meaning strictly to strike a person out of his senses by some strong feeling, such as fear, wonder, or even joy" (Gould). {And not as their scribes} (\kai ouch hs hoi grammateis\). strkjv@Luke:4:32| has only "with authority" (\en exousii\). Mark has it "as having authority" (\hs echn exousian\). He struck a note not found by the rabbi. They quoted other rabbis and felt their function to be expounders of the traditions which they made a millstone around the necks of the people. By so doing they set aside the word and will of God by their traditions and petty legalism (Mark:7:9,13|). They were casuists and made false interpretations to prove their punctilious points of external etiquette to the utter neglect of the spiritual reality. The people noticed at once that here was a personality who got his power (authority) direct from God, not from the current scribes. "Mark omits much, and is in many ways a meagre Gospel, but it makes a distinctive contribution to the evangelic history _in showing by a few realistic touches_ (this one of them) _the remarkable personality of Jesus_" (Bruce). See on strkjv@Matthew:7:29| for the like impression made by the Sermon on the Mount where the same language occurs. The chief controversy in Christ's life was with these scribes, the professional teachers of the oral law and mainly Pharisees. At once the people see that Jesus stands apart from the old group. He made a sensation in the best sense of that word. There was a buzz of excitement at the new teacher that was increased by the miracle that followed the sermon.
rwp@Mark:6:3 @{Is not this the carpenter?} (\Ouch houtos estin ho tektn;\). strkjv@Matthew:13:55| calls him "the carpenter's son" (\ho tou tektonos huios\). He was both. Evidently since Joseph's death he had carried on the business and was "the carpenter" of Nazareth. The word \tektn\ comes from \tekein, tikt\, to beget, create, like \techn\ (craft, art). It is a very old word, from Homer down. It was originally applied to the worker in wood or builder with wood like our carpenter. Then it was used of any artisan or craftsman in metal, or in stone as well as in wood and even of sculpture. It is certain that Jesus worked in wood. Justin Martyr speaks of ploughs, yokes, et cetera, made by Jesus. He may also have worked in stone and may even have helped build some of the stone synagogues in Galilee like that in Capernaum. But in Nazareth the people knew him, his family (no mention of Joseph), and his trade and discounted all that they now saw with their own eyes and heard with their own ears. This word carpenter "throws the only flash which falls on the continuous tenor of the first thirty years from infancy to manhood, of the life of Christ" (Farrar). That is an exaggeration for we have strkjv@Luke:2:41-50| and "as his custom was" (Luke:4:16|), to go no further. But we are grateful for Mark's realistic use of \tektn\ here. {And they were offended in him} (\kai eskandalizonto en auti\). Songs:exactly strkjv@Matthew:13:56|, {were made to stumble in him}, trapped like game by the \skandalon\ because they could not explain him, having been so recently one of them. "The Nazarenes found their stumbling block in the person or circumstances of Jesus. He became--\petra skandalou\ (1Peter:2:7,8; strkjv@Romans:9:33|) to those who disbelieved" (Swete). Both Mark and strkjv@Matthew:13:57|, which see, preserve the retort of Jesus with the quotation of the current proverb about a prophet's lack of honour in his own country. strkjv@John:4:44| quoted it from Jesus on his return to Galilee long before this. It is to be noted that Jesus here makes a definite claim to being a prophet (\prophts\, forspeaker for God), a seer. He was much more than this as he had already claimed to be Messiah (John:4:26; strkjv@Luke:4:21|), the Son of man with power of God (Mark:1:10; strkjv@Matthew:9:6; strkjv@Luke:5:24|), the Son of God (John:5:22|). They stumble at Jesus today as the townspeople of Nazareth did. {In his own house} (\en ti oikii autou\). Also in strkjv@Matthew:13:57|. This was the saddest part of it all, that his own brothers in his own home disbelieved his Messianic claims (John:7:5|). This puzzle was the greatest of all.
rwp@Mark:9:22 @{But if thou canst} (\all 'ei ti duni\). Jesus had asked (verse 21|) the history of the case like a modern physician. The father gave it and added further pathetic details about the fire and the water. The failure of the disciples had not wholly destroyed his faith in the power of Jesus, though the conditional form (first class, assuming it to be true) does suggest doubt whether the boy can be cured at all. It was a chronic and desperate case of epilepsy with the demon possession added. {Help us} (\boethson hemin\). Ingressive aorist imperative. Do it now. With touching tenderness he makes the boy's case his own as the Syrophoenician woman had said, "Have mercy on me" (Matthew:15:21|). The leper had said: "If thou wilt" (Mark:1:40|). This father says: "If thou canst."
rwp@Mark:9:25 @{A multitude came running together} (\episuntrechei ochlos\). A double compound here alone in the N.T. and not in the old Greek writers. \Epitrech\ occurs in the papyri, but not \episuntrech\. The double compound vividly describes the rapid gathering of the crowd to Jesus and the epileptic boy to see the outcome. {Come out of him} (\exelthe ex autou\). Jesus addresses the demon as a separate being from the boy as he often does. This makes it difficult to believe that Jesus was merely indulging popular belief in a superstition. He evidently regards the demon as the cause in this case of the boy's misfortune.
rwp@Mark:11:19 @{Every evening} (\hotan opse egeneto\). Literally, {whenever evening came on} or more exactly {whenever it became late}. The use of \hotan\ (\hote an\) with the aorist indicative is like \hopou an\ with the imperfect indicative (\eiseporeueto\) and \hosoi an\ with the aorist indicative (\hpsanto\) in strkjv@Mark:6:56|. The use of \an\ makes the clause more indefinite and general, as here, unless it renders it more definite, a curious result, but true. strkjv@Luke:21:37| has the accusative of extent of time, "the days," "the nights." The imperfect tense he (or they) would go (\exeporeueto, exeporeuonto\) out of the city suggests "whenever" as the meaning here.
rwp@Mark:14:35 @{Fell on the ground} (\epipten epi ts gs\). Descriptive imperfect. See him falling. Matthew has the aorist \epesen\. {Prayed} (\prosucheto\). Imperfect, prayed repeatedly or inchoative, began to pray. Either makes good sense. {The hour} (\h hra\). Jesus had long looked forward to this "hour" and had often mentioned it (John:7:30; strkjv@8:20; strkjv@12:23,27; strkjv@13:1|). See again in strkjv@Mark:14:41|. Now he dreads it, surely a human trait that all can understand.
rwp@Mark:16:9 @{When he had risen early on the first day of the week} (\anastas pri prti sabbatou\). It is probable that this note of time goes with "risen" (\anastas\), though it makes good sense with "appeared" (\ephan\). Jesus is not mentioned by name here, though he is clearly the one meant. Mark uses \mia\ in verse 2|, but \prt\ in strkjv@14:12| and the plural \sabbatn\ in verse 2|, though the singular here. {First} (\prton\). Definite statement that Jesus {appeared} (\ephan\) to Mary Magdalene first of all. The verb \ephan\ (second aorist passive of \phain\) is here alone of the Risen Christ (cf. \Eleias ephan\, strkjv@Luke:9:8|), the usual verb being \phth\ (Luke:24:34; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:5ff.|). {From whom} (\par' hs\). Only instance of \para\ with the casting out of demons, \ek\ being usual (1:25,26; strkjv@5:8; strkjv@7:26,29; strkjv@9:25|). \Ekbeblkei\ is past perfect indicative without augment. This description of Mary Magdalene is like that in strkjv@Luke:8:2| and seems strange in Mark at this point, described as a new character here, though mentioned by Mark three times just before (15:40,47; strkjv@16:1|). The appearance to Mary Magdalene is given in full by strkjv@John:20:11-18|.
rwp@Matthew:1:1 @{The Son of David, the son of Abraham} (\huiou Daueid huiou Abraam\). Matthew proposes to show that Jesus Christ is on the human side the son of David, as the Messiah was to be, and the son of Abraham, not merely a real Jew and the heir of the promises, but the promise made to Abraham. Songs:Matthew begins his line with Abraham while Luke traces his line back to Adam. The Hebrew and Aramaic often used the word son (\bn\) for the quality or character, but here the idea is descent. Christians are called sons of God because Christ has bestowed this dignity upon us (Romans:8:14; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@Galatians:3:26; strkjv@4:5-7|). Verse 1 is the description of the list in verses 2-17|. The names are given in three groups, Abraham to David (2-6|), David to Babylon Removal (6-11|), Jechoniah to Jesus (12-16|). The removal to Babylon (\metoikesias Babulnos\) occurs at the end of verse 11|, the beginning of verse 12|, and twice in the resume in verse 17|. This great event is used to mark off the two last divisions from each other. It is a good illustration of the genitive as the case of genus or kind. The Babylon removal could mean either to Babylon or from Babylon or, indeed, the removal of Babylon. But the readers would know the facts from the Old Testament, the removal of the Jews to Babylon. Then verse 17| makes a summary of the three lists, fourteen in each by counting David twice and omitting several, a sort of mnemonic device that is common enough. Matthew does not mean to say that there were only fourteen in actual genealogy. The names of the women (Thamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba the wife of Uriah) are likewise not counted. But it is a most interesting list.
rwp@Matthew:1:19 @{A Righteous Man} (\dikaios\). Or just, not benignant or merciful. The same adjective is used of Zacharias and Elizabeth (Luke:1:6|) and Simeon (Luke:2:25|). "An upright man," the _Braid Scots_ has it. He had the Jewish conscientiousness for the observance of the law which would have been death by stoning (Deuteronomy:22:23|). Though Joseph was upright, he would not do that. "As a good Jew he would have shown his zeal if he had branded her with public disgrace" (McNeile). {And yet not willing} (\kai m theln\). Songs:we must understand \kai\ here, "and yet." Matthew makes a distinction here between "willing" (\theln\) and "wishing" (\eboulth\), that between purpose (\thel\) and desire (\boulomai\) a distinction not always drawn, though present here. It was not his purpose to "make her a public example" (\deigmatisai\), from the root (\deiknumi\ to show), a rare word (Colossians:2:15|). The Latin Vulgate has it _traducere_, the Old Latin _divulgare_, Wycliff _pupplische_ (publish), Tyndale _defame_, Moffatt _disgrace_, Braid Scots "Be i the mooth o' the public." The substantive (\deigmatismos\) occurs on the Rosetta Stone in the sense of "verification." There are a few instances of the verb in the papyri though the meaning is not clear (Moulton and Milligan's _Vocabulary_). The compound form appears (\paradeigmatiz\) in strkjv@Hebrews:6:6| and there are earlier instances of this compound than of the uncompounded, curiously enough. But new examples of the simple verb, like the substantive, may yet be found. The papyri examples mean to furnish a sample (P Tebt. 5.75), to make trial of (P Ryl. I. 28.32). The substantive means exposure in (P Ryl. I. 28.70). At any rate it is clear that Joseph "was minded to put her away privily." He could give her a bill of divorcement (\apolusai\), the \gt\ laid down in the Mishna, without a public trial. He had to give her the writ (\gt\) and pay the fine (Deuteronomy:24:1|). Songs:he proposed to do this privately (\lathrai\) to avoid all the scandal possible. One is obliged to respect and sympathize with the motives of Joseph for he evidently loved Mary and was appalled to find her untrue to him as he supposed. It is impossible to think of Joseph as the actual father of Jesus according to the narrative of Matthew without saying that Matthew has tried by legend to cover up the illegitimate birth of Jesus. The Talmud openly charges this sin against Mary. Joseph had "a short but tragic struggle between his legal conscience and his love" (McNeile).
rwp@Matthew:6:25 @{For your life} (\ti psuchi\). "Here \psuchi\ stands for the life principle common to man and beast, which is embodied in the \sma\: the former needs food, the latter clothing" (McNeile). \Psuch\ in the Synoptic Gospels occurs in three senses (McNeile): either the life principle in the body as here and which man may kill (Mark:3:4|) or the seat of the thoughts and emotions on a par with \kardia\ and \dianoia\ (Matthew:22:37|) and \pneuma\ (Luke:1:46|; cf. strkjv@John:12:27; strkjv@13:21|) or something higher that makes up the real self (Matthew:10:28; strkjv@16:26|). In strkjv@Matthew:16:25| (Luke:9:25|) \psuch\ appears in two senses paradoxical use, saving life and losing it.
rwp@Matthew:6:27 @{Unto his stature} (\epi tn hlikian autou\). The word \hlikian\ is used either of height (stature) or length of life (age). Either makes good sense here, though probably "stature" suits the context best. Certainly anxiety will not help either kind of growth, but rather hinder by auto-intoxication if nothing more. This is no plea for idleness, for even the birds are diligent and the flowers grow.
rwp@Matthew:8:12 @{Into the outer darkness} (\eis to skotos to exteron\). Comparative adjective like our "further out," the darkness outside the limits of the lighted palace, one of the figures for hell or punishment (Matthew:23:13; strkjv@25:30|). The repeated article makes it bolder and more impressive, "the darkness the outside," there where the wailing and gnashing of teeth is heard in the thick blackness of night.
rwp@Matthew:17:4 @{And Peter answered} (\apokritheis de ho Petros\). "Peter to the front again, but not greatly to his credit" (Bruce). It is not clear what Peter means by his saying: "It is good for us to be here" (\kalon estin hms hde einai\). Luke (Luke:9:33|) adds "not knowing what he said," as they "were heavy with sleep." Songs:it is not well to take Peter too seriously on this occasion. At any rate he makes a definite proposal. {I will make} (\pais\). Future indicative though aorist subjunctive has same form. {Tabernacles} (\sknas\), booths. The Feast of Tabernacles was not far away. Peter may have meant that they should just stay up here on the mountain and not go to Jerusalem for the feast.
rwp@Matthew:20:17 @{Apart} (\kat' idian\). This is the prediction in Matthew of the cross (16:21; strkjv@17:22; strkjv@20:17|). "Aside by themselves" (Moffatt). The verb is \parelaben\. Jesus is having his inward struggle (Mark:10:32|) and makes one more effort to get the Twelve to understand him.
rwp@Matthew:21:4 @{By the prophet} (\dia tou prophtou\). The first line is from strkjv@Isaiah:62:11|, the rest from strkjv@Zechariah:9:9|. John (John:12:14f.|) makes it clear that Jesus did not quote the passage himself. In Matthew it is not so plain, but probably it is his own comment about the incident. It is not Christ's intention to fulfil the prophecy, simply that his conduct did fulfil it.
rwp@Matthew:26:45 @{Sleep on now and take your rest} (\katheudete loipon kai anapauesthe\). This makes it "mournful irony" (Plummer) or reproachful concession: "Ye may sleep and rest indefinitely so far as I am concerned; I need no longer your watchful interest" (Bruce). It may be a sad query as Goodspeed: "Are you still sleeping and taking your rest?" Songs:Moffatt. This use of \loipon\ for now or henceforth is common in the papyri. {The hour is at hand} (\ggiken h hra\). Time for action has now come. They have missed their chance for sympathy with Jesus. He has now won the victory without their aid. "The Master's time of weakness is past; He is prepared to face the worst" (Bruce). {Is betrayed} (\paradidotai\). Futuristic present or inchoative present, the first act in the betrayal is at hand. Jesus had foreseen his "hour" for long and now he faces it bravely.
rwp@Matthew:26:63 @{Held his peace} (\esipa\). Kept silent, imperfect tense. Jesus refused to answer the bluster of Caiaphas. {I adjure thee by the living God} (\exorkiz se kata tou theou tou zntos\). Songs:Caiaphas put Jesus on oath in order to make him incriminate himself, a thing unlawful in Jewish jurisprudence. He had failed to secure any accusation against Jesus that would stand at all. But Jesus did not refuse to answer under solemn oath, clearly showing that he was not thinking of oaths in courts of justice when he prohibited profanity. The charge that Caiaphas makes is that Jesus claims to be the Messiah, the Son of God. To refuse to answer would be tantamount to a denial. Songs:Jesus answered knowing full well the use that would be made of his confession and claim.
rwp@Matthew:26:73 @{They that stood by} (\hoi hesttes\). The talk about Peter continued. Luke (Luke:22:59|) states that the little while was about an hour. The bystanders came up to Peter and bluntly assert that he was "of a truth" (\alths\) one of the followers of Jesus for his speech betrayed him. Even the Revised Version retains "bewrayeth," quaint old English for "betrayeth." The Greek has it simply "makes thee evident" (\dlon se poiei\). His dialect (\lalia\) clearly revealed that he was a Galilean. The Galileans had difficulty with the gutterals and Peter's second denial had exposed him to the tormenting raillery of the loungers who continued to nag him.
rwp@Matthew:27:9 @{By Jeremiah the prophet} (\dia Ieremiou\). This quotation comes mainly from strkjv@Zechariah:11:13| though not in exact language. In strkjv@Jeremiah:18:18| the prophet tells of a visit to a potter's house and in strkjv@Jeremiah:32:6ff.| of the purchase of a field. It is in Zechariah that the thirty pieces of silver are mentioned. Many theories are offered for the combination of Zechariah and Jeremiah and attributing it all to Jeremiah as in strkjv@Mark:1:2f.| the quotation from Isaiah and Malachi is referred wholly to Isaiah as the more prominent of the two. Broadus and McNeile give a full discussion of the various theories from a mere mechanical slip to the one just given above. Matthew has here (27:10|) "the field of the potter" (\eis ton agron tou kerames\) for "the potter the house of the Lord" in strkjv@Zechariah:11:13|. That makes it more parallel with the language of strkjv@Matthew:27:7|.
rwp@Matthew:27:17 @{Barabbas or Jesus which is called Christ?} (\Barabbn Isoun ton legomenon Christon;\). Pilate was catching at straws or seeking any loophole to escape condemning a harmless lunatic or exponent of a superstitious cult such as he deemed Jesus to be, certainly in no political sense a rival of Caesar. The Jews interpreted "Christ" for Pilate to be a claim to be King of the Jews in opposition to Caesar, "a most unprincipled proceeding" (Bruce). Songs:he bethought him of the time-honoured custom at the passover of releasing to the people "a prisoner whom they wished" (\desmion hon thelon\). No parallel case has been found, but Josephus mentions the custom (_Ant_. xx. 9,3). Barabbas was for some reason a popular hero, a notable (\epismon\), if not notorious, prisoner, leader of an insurrection or revolution (Mark:15:7|) probably against Rome, and so guilty of the very crime that they tried to fasten on Jesus who only claimed to be king in the spiritual sense of the spiritual kingdom. Songs:Pilate unwittingly pitted against each other two prisoners who represented the antagonistic forces of all time. It is an elliptical structure in the question, "whom do you wish that I release?" (\tina thelete apolus;\), either two questions in one (asyndeton) or the ellipse of \hina\ before \apolus\. See the same idiom in verse 21|. But Pilate's question tested the Jews as well as himself. It tests all men today. Some manuscripts add the name Jesus to Barabbas and that makes it all the sharper. Jesus Barabbas or Jesus Christ?
rwp@Matthew:27:49 @{Whether Elijah cometh to save him} (\ei erchetai Eleias ssn auton\). The excuse had a pious sound as they misunderstood the words of Jesus in his outcry of soul anguish. We have here one of the rare instances (\ssn\) of the future participle to express purpose in the N.T. though a common Greek idiom. Some ancient MSS. add here what is genuine in strkjv@John:19:34|, but what makes complete wreck of the context for in verse 50| Jesus cried with a loud voice and was not yet dead in verse 49|. It was a crass mechanical copying by some scribe from strkjv@John:19:34|. See full discussion in my _Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the N.T._
rwp@Matthew:28:17 @{But some doubted} (\hoi de edistasan\). From \dis\ (in two, divided in mind). Cf. strkjv@Matthew:14:31|. The reference is not to the eleven who were all now convinced after some doubt, but to the others present. Paul states that over five hundred were present, most of whom were still alive when he wrote (1Corinthians:15:6|). It is natural that some should hesitate to believe so great a thing at the first appearance of Jesus to them. Their very doubt makes it easier for us to believe. This was the mountain where Jesus had promised to meet them. This fact explains the large number present. Time and place were arranged beforehand. It was the climax of the various appearances and in Galilee where were so many believers. They worshipped (\prosekunsan\) Jesus as the women had done (28:9|). He is now their Risen Lord and Saviour.
rwp@Philippians:1:22 @{If this is the fruit of my work} (\touto moi karpos ergou\). There is no \ei\ (if) here in the Greek, but \touto\ (this) seems to be resumptive and to repeat the conditional clause just before. If so, \kai\ just after means {then} and introduces the conclusion of the condition. Otherwise \touto\ introduces the conclusion and \kai\ means {and}. {I wot not} (\ou gnriz\). "I know not." It seems odd to preserve the old English word "wot" here. But it is not clear that \gnriz\ (old causative verb from \ginsk\) means just to know. Elsewhere in the N.T., as in strkjv@Luke:2:15; strkjv@Romans:9:22|, it means to make known, to declare. The papyri examples mean to make known. It makes perfectly good sense to take its usual meaning here, "I do not declare what I shall choose."
rwp@Philippians:2:12 @{Not as in my presence only} (\m hs en ti parousii monon\). B and a few other MSS. omit \hs\. The negative \m\ goes with the imperative \katergazesthe\ (work out), not with \hupkousate\ (obeyed) which would call for \ouch\. {Much more} (\polli mallon\). They are not to render eye-service only when Paul is there, but much more when he is away. {Work out} (\katergazesthe\). Perfective use of \kata\ (down) in composition, work on to the finish. This exhortation assumes human free agency in the carrying on the work of one's salvation. {With fear and trembling} (\meta phobou kai tromou\). "Not slavish terror, but wholesome, serious caution" (Vincent). "A nervous and trembling anxiety to do right" (Lightfoot). Paul has no sympathy with a cold and dead orthodoxy or formalism that knows nothing of struggle and growth. He exhorts as if he were an Arminian in addressing men. He prays as if he were a Calvinist in addressing God and feels no inconsistency in the two attitudes. Paul makes no attempt to reconcile divine sovereignty and human free agency, but boldly proclaims both.
rwp@Philippians:3:3 @{For we} (\hmeis gar\). We believers in Christ, the children of Abraham by faith, whether Jew or Gentile, the spiritual circumcision in contrast to the merely physical (Romans:2:25-29; strkjv@Colossians:2:11; strkjv@Ephesians:2:11|). See strkjv@Galatians:5:12| for \apotemnein\ (to cut off) in sense of mutilation also. {By the Spirit of God} (\pneumati theou\). Instrumental case, though the dative case as the object of \latreu\ makes good sense also (worshipping the Spirit of God) or even the locative (worshipping in the Spirit of God). {No} (\ouk\). Actual condition rather than \m\ with the participle. {In the flesh} (\en sarki\). Technical term in Paul's controversy with the Judaizers (2Corinthians:11:18; Gal strkjv@6:13f.|). External privileges beyond mere flesh.
rwp@Philippians:3:19 @{Whose god is the belly} (\hou to theos h koilia\). The comic poet Eupolis uses the rare word \Koiliodaimn\ for one who makes a god of his belly and Seneca speaks of one who _abdomini servit_. Sensuality in food, drink, sex then as now mastered some men. These men posed as Christians and gloried in their shame. {Who mind earthly things} (\hoi ta epigeia phronountes\). Anacoluthon. The nominative does not refer to \polloi\ at the beginning, but with the accusative \tous echthrous\ in between. See strkjv@Mark:12:40|.
rwp@Revelation:11:4 @{The two olive trees} (\hai duo elaiai\). The article seems to point to what is known. For this original use of \elaia\ see strkjv@Romans:11:17,24|. In strkjv@Zechariah:4:2,3,14| the lampstand or candlestick (\luchnia\) is Israel, and the two olive trees apparently Joshua and Zerubbabel, but John makes his own use of this symbolism. Here the two olive trees and the candlesticks are identical. {Standing} (\hesttes\). Masculine perfect active participle agreeing with \houtoi\ instead of \hestsai\ (read by P and cursives) agreeing with \elaiai kai luchniai\, even though \hai\ (feminine plural article) be accepted before \enpion tou kuriou\ (before the Lord).
rwp@Romans:1:8 @{First} (\prton men\). Adverb in the accusative case, but no \epeita de\ (in the next place) as in strkjv@Hebrews:7:2| or \epeita\ as in strkjv@James:3:17| follows. The rush of thoughts crowds out the balanced phraseology as in strkjv@Romans:3:2; strkjv@1Corinthians:11:18|. {Through} (\dia\). As the mediator or medium of thanksgiving as in strkjv@7:25|. {For} (\peri\). Concerning, about. {That} (\hoti\). Or because. Either declarative or causal \hoti\ makes sense here. {Your faith} (\h pistis humn\). "Your Christianity" (Sanday and Headlam). {Is proclaimed} (\kataggelletai\). Present passive indicative of \kataggell\, to announce (\aggell\) up and down (\kata\). See also \anaggell\, to bring back news (John:5:15|), \apaggell\, to announce from one as the source (Matthew:2:8|), \prokataggell\, to announce far and wide beforehand (Acts:3:18|). {Throughout all the world} (\en holi ti kosmi\). Natural hyperbole as in strkjv@Colossians:1:6; strkjv@Acts:17:6|. But widely known because the church was in the central city of the empire.
rwp@Romans:1:18 @{For the wrath of God is revealed} (\apokaluptetai gar org theou\). Note in Romans Paul's use of \gar\, now argumentative, now explanatory, now both as here. There is a parallel and antecedent revelation (see verse 17|) of God's wrath corresponding to the revelation of God's righteousness, this an unwritten revelation, but plainly made known. \Org\ is from \orga\, to teem, to swell. It is the temper of God towards sin, not rage, but the wrath of reason and law (Shedd). The revelation of God's righteousness in the gospel was necessary because of the failure of men to attain it without it, for God's wrath justly rested upon all both Gentiles (1:18-32|) and Jews (2:1-3:20|). {Ungodliness} (\asebeian\). Irreligion, want of reverence toward God, old word (cf. strkjv@2Timothy:2:16|). {Unrighteousness} (\adikian\). Lack (\a\ privative and \dik\) of right conduct toward men, injustice (Romans:9:14; strkjv@Luke:18:6|). This follows naturally from irreverence. The basis of ethical conduct rests on the nature of God and our attitude toward him, otherwise the law of the jungle (cf. Nietzsche, "might makes right"). {Hold down the truth} (\tn altheian katechontn\). Truth (\altheia, alths\, from \a\ privative and \lth\ or \lanthan\, to conceal) is out in the open, but wicked men, so to speak, put it in a box and sit on the lid and "hold it down in unrighteousness." Their evil deeds conceal the open truth of God from men. Cf. strkjv@2Thessalonians:2:6f.| for this use of \katech\, to hinder.
rwp@Romans:3:3 @{For what if?} (\ti gar ei?\). But Westcott and Hort print it, \Ti gar? ei\. See strkjv@Phillipians:1:18| for this exclamatory use of \ti gar\ (for how? How stands the case?). {Some were without faith} (\pistsan\). First aorist active indicative of \apiste\, old verb, to disbelieve. This is the common N.T. meaning (Luke:24:11,41; strkjv@Acts:28:24; strkjv@Romans:4:20|). Some of them "disbelieved," these "depositaries and guardians of revelation" (Denney). But the word also means to be unfaithful to one's trust and Lightfoot argues for that idea here and in strkjv@2Timothy:2:13|. The Revised Version renders it "faithless" there. Either makes sense here and both ideas are true of some of the Jews, especially concerning the Messianic promises and Jesus. {The faithfulness of God} (\tn pistin tou theou\). Undoubtedly \pistis\ has this sense here and not "faith." God has been faithful (2Timothy:2:13|) whether the Jews (some of them) were simply disbelievers or untrue to their trust. Paul can use the words in two senses in verse 3|, but there is no real objection to taking \pistsan, apistian, pistin\, all to refer to faithfulness rather than just faith.
rwp@Romans:3:5 @{What shall we say?} (\ti eroumen?\). Rhetorical question, common with Paul as he surveys the argument. {Commendeth} (\sunistsin\). This common verb \sunistmi\, to send together, occurs in the N.T. in two senses, either to introduce, to commend (2Corinthians:3:1; strkjv@4:2|) or to prove, to establish (2Corinthians:7:11; strkjv@Galatians:2:18; strkjv@Romans:5:8|). Either makes good sense here. {Who visiteth the wrath} (\ho epiphern tn orgn\). "Who brings on the wrath," "the inflicter of the anger" (Vaughan). {I speak as a man} (\kata anthrpon\). See strkjv@Galatians:3:15| for same phrase. As if to say, "pardon me for this line of argument." Tholuck says that the rabbis often used \kata anthrpon\ and \ti eroumen\. Paul had not forgotten his rabbinical training.
rwp@Romans:4:23 @{That} (\hoti\). Either recitative or declarative \hoti\. It makes sense either way.
rwp@Romans:6:3 @{Were baptized into Christ} (\ebaptisthmen eis Christon\). First aorist passive indicative of \baptiz\. Better, "were baptized unto Christ or in Christ." The translation "into" makes Paul say that the union with Christ was brought to pass by means of baptism, which is not his idea, for Paul was not a sacramentarian. \Eis\ is at bottom the same word as \en\. Baptism is the public proclamation of one's inward spiritual relation to Christ attained before the baptism. See on ¯Galatians:3:27| where it is like putting on an outward garment or uniform. {Into his death} (\eis ton thanaton autou\). Songs:here "unto his death," "in relation to his death," which relation Paul proceeds to explain by the symbolism of the ordinance.
rwp@Romans:6:11 @{Reckon ye also yourselves} (\kai humeis logizesthe\). Direct middle imperative of \logizomai\ and complete proof that Paul does not mean that baptism makes one dead to sin and alive to God. That is a spiritual operation "in Christ Jesus" and only pictured by baptism. This is a plea to live up to the ideal of the baptized life.
rwp@Romans:7:4 @{Ye also were made to the law} (\kai humeis ethanatthte\). First aorist indicative passive of \thanato\, old verb, to put to death (Matthew:10:21|) or to make to die (extinct) as here and strkjv@Romans:8:13|. The analogy calls for the death of the law, but Paul refuses to say that. He changes the structure and makes them dead to the law as the husband (6:3-6|). The relation of marriage is killed "through the body of Christ" as the "propitiation" (3:25|) for us. Cf. strkjv@Colossians:1:22|. {That we should be joined to another} (\eis to genesthai heteri\). Purpose clause with \eis to\ and the infinitive. First mention of the saints as wedded to Christ as their Husband occurs in strkjv@1Corinthians:6:13; strkjv@Galatians:4:26|. See further strkjv@Ephesians:5:22-33|. {That we might bring forth fruit unto God} (\hina karpophorsmen ti thei\). He changes the metaphor to that of the tree used in strkjv@6:22|.
rwp@Romans:8:24 @{For by hope were we saved} (\ti gar elpidi esthmen\). First aorist passive indicative of \sz\. The case of \elpidi\ is not certain, the form being the same for locative, instrumental and dative. Curiously enough either makes good sense in this context: "We were saved in hope, by hope, for hope" (of the redemption of the body).
rwp@Romans:8:27 @{He that searcheth} (\ho eraunn\). God (1Samuel:16:7|). {According to the will of God} (\kata theon\). See strkjv@2Corinthians:7:9-11| for this phrase \kata theon\ (according to God). The Holy Spirit is the "other Paraclete" (John:14:16|) who pleads God's cause with us as Christ is our Paraclete with the Father (1John:2:1|). But more is true as here, for the Holy Spirit interprets our prayers to God and "makes intercession for us in accord with God's will."
rwp@Romans:8:28 @{All things work together} (\panta sunergei\). A B have \ho theos\ as the subject of \sunergei\ (old verb, see on ¯1Corinthians:16:16; strkjv@2Corinthians:6:1|). That is the idea anyhow. It is God who makes "all things work together" in our lives "for good" (\eis agathon\), ultimate good. {According to his purpose} (\kata prothesin\). Old word, seen already in strkjv@Acts:27:13| and for "shewbread" in strkjv@Matthew:12:4|. The verb \protithmi\ Paul uses in strkjv@3:24| for God's purpose. Paul accepts fully human free agency but behind it all and through it all runs God's sovereignty as here and on its gracious side (9:11; strkjv@3:11; strkjv@2Timothy:1:9|).
rwp@Romans:9:1 @{In Christ} (\en Christi\). Paul really takes a triple oath here so strongly is he stirred. He makes a positive affirmation in Christ, a negative one (not lying), the appeal to his conscience as co-witness (\sunmarturouss\, genitive absolute as in strkjv@2:15| which see) "in the Holy Spirit."
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}