NT-GOSPEL.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: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:6:19 @{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: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:15:19 @{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:15:47 @{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@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: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:3:12 @{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:3:18 @{In word, neither with the tongue} (\logi mde ti glssi\). Either instrumental or locative makes sense. What John means is "not merely by word or by the tongue." He does not condemn kind words which are comforting and cheering, but warm words should be accompanied by warm deeds to make real "in deed and in truth" (\en ergi kai altheii\). Here is a case where actions do speak louder than mere words.
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@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: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@Info_2Peter @ AND PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF PETER The writer makes use of his own contact with Jesus, especially at the Transfiguration of Christ (Mark:9:2-8; strkjv@Matthew:17:1-8; strkjv@Luke:9:28-36|). This fact has been used against the genuineness of the Epistle on the plea that the writer is too anxious, anyhow, to show that he is Symeon Peter (2Peter:1:1|). But Bigg rightly replies that, if he had only given his name with no personal contacts with Jesus, the name would be called "a forged addition." It is possible also that the experience on the Mount of Transfiguration may have been suggested by Peter's use of \exodos\ for his own death (2Peter:1:15|), the very word used by Luke (Luke:9:31|) as the topic of discussion between Jesus and Moses and Elijah. There is also in strkjv@2Peter:1:13| the use of "tent" (\sknoma\) for the life in the body, like Peter's use of "tents" (\sknas\) to Jesus at that very time (Mark:9:5; strkjv@Matthew:17:4; strkjv@Luke:9:33|). In strkjv@2Peter:1:14| Peter also refers to the plain words of Jesus about his coming death (John:21:18f.|). In strkjv@2Peter:1:15| Peter speaks of his own plan for preserving the knowledge of Jesus when he is gone (possibly by Mark's Gospel). All this is in perfect keeping with Peter's own nature.
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@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:1:3 @{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: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: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: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:16:9 @{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: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:20:20 @{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: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:26:16 @{Arise and stand} (\anastthi kai stthi\). "Emphatic assonance" (Page). Second aorist active imperative of compound verb (\anistmi\) and simplex (\histmi\). "Stand up and take a stand." {Have I appeared unto thee} (\phthn soi\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora\. See on ¯Luke:22:43|. {To appoint thee} (\procheirisasthai se\). See strkjv@3:30; strkjv@22:14| for this verb. {Both of the things wherein thou hast seen me} (\hn te eides me\). The reading \me\ (not in all MSS.) makes it the object of \eides\ (didst see) and \hn\ is genitive of \ha\ (accusative of general reference) attracted to the case of the unexpressed antecedent \toutn\. Paul is thus a personal eyewitness of the Risen Christ (Luke:1:1; strkjv@1Corinthians:4:1; strkjv@9:1|). {And of the things wherein I will appear unto thee} (\hn te ophthsomai soi\). Here again \hn\ is genitive of the accusative (general reference) relative \ha\ attracted to the case of the antecedent \toutn\ or \ekeinn\ as before. But \ophthsomai\ is first future passive of \hora\ and cannot be treated as active or middle. Page takes it to mean "the visions in which I shall be seen by you," the passive form bringing out the agency of God. See those in strkjv@Acts:18:9; strkjv@23:11; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:2|. The passive voice, however, like \apekrithn\ and \ephobthn\, did become sometimes transitive in the _Koin_ (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 819).
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:2:3 @{In whom} (\en hi\). This locative form can refer to \mustriou\ or to \Christou\. It really makes no difference in sense since Christ is the mystery of God. {All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge} (\pantes hoi thsauroi ts sophias kai gnses\). See on ¯Matthew:2:11; strkjv@6:19-21| for this old word, our thesaurus, for coffer, storehouse, treasure. Paul confronts these pretentious intellectuals (Gnostics) with the bold claim that Christ sums up all wisdom and knowledge. These treasures are hidden (\apokruphoi\, old adjective from \apokrupt\, to hide away, strkjv@Mark:4:22|) whether the Gnostics have discovered them or not. They are there (in Christ) as every believer knows by fresh and repeated discovery.
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@ verses, as printed, 3-4-58 make no sense. 34-58 makes little
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@Galatians:4:24 @{Which things contain an allegory} (\hatina estin allgoroumena\). Literally, "Which things are allegorized" (periphrastic present passive indicative of \allgore\). Late word (Strabo, Plutarch, Philo, Josephus, ecclesiastical writers), only here in N.T. The ancient writers used \ainittomai\ to speak in riddles. It is compounded of \allo\, another, and \agoreu\, to speak, and so means speaking something else than what the language means, what Philo, the past-master in the use of allegory, calls the deeper spiritual sense. Paul does not deny the actual historical narrative, but he simply uses it in an allegorical sense to illustrate his point for the benefit of his readers who are tempted to go under the burden of the law. He puts a secondary meaning on the narrative just as he uses \tupiks\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:10:11| of the narrative. We need not press unduly the difference between allegory and type, for each is used in a variety of ways. The allegory in one sense is a speaking parable like Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_, the Prodigal Son in strkjv@Luke:15|, the Good Shepherd in strkjv@John:10|. But allegory was also used by Philo and by Paul here for a secret meaning not obvious at first, one not in the mind of the writer, like our illustration which throws light on the point. Paul was familiar with this rabbinical method of exegesis (Rabbi Akiba, for instance, who found a mystical sense in every hook and crook of the Hebrew letters) and makes skilful use of that knowledge here. Christian preachers in Alexandria early fell victims to Philo's allegorical method and carried it to excess without regard to the plain sense of the narrative. That startling style of preaching survives yet to the discredit of sound preaching. Please observe that Paul says here that he is using allegory, not ordinary interpretation. It is not necessary to say that Paul intended his readers to believe that this allegory was designed by the narrative. He illustrates his point by it. {For these are} (\hautai gar eisin\). Allegorically interpreted, he means. {From Mount Sinai} (\apo orous Sin\). Spoken from Mount Sinai. {Bearing} (\gennsa\). Present active participle of \genna\, to beget of the male (Matthew:1:1-16|), more rarely as here to bear of the female (Luke:1:13,57|). {Which is Hagar} (\htis estin Hagar\). Allegorically interpreted.
rwp@Galatians:5:19 @{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@Galatians:5:24 @{Crucified the flesh} (\tn sarka estaursan\). Definite event, first aorist active indicative of \stauro\ as in strkjv@2:19| (mystical union with Christ). Paul uses \sarx\ here in the same sense as in verses 16,17,19|, "the force in men that makes for evil" (Burton). {With} (\sun\). "Together with," emphasizing "the completeness of the extermination of this evil force" and the guarantee of victory over one's passions and dispositions toward evil.
rwp@Info_Hebrews @ THE DATE Here again modern scholars differ widely. Westcott places it between A.D. 64 and 67. Harnack and Holtzmann prefer a date between 81 and 96. Marcus Dods argues strongly that the Epistle was written while the temple was still standing. If it was already destroyed, it is hard to understand how the author could have written strkjv@Hebrews:10:1f.|: "Else would they not have ceased to be offered?" And in strkjv@Hebrews:8:13| "nigh to vanishing away" (\eggus aphanismou\) is only intelligible with the temple service still going on. The author makes use of the tabernacle instead of the temple because the temple was patterned after the tabernacle. On the other hand, the mention of Timothy in strkjv@Hebrews:13:23| as being "set free" (\apolelumenon\) raises an inquiry concerning Paul's last plea to Timothy to come to him in Rome (2Timothy:4:11-13|). Apparently Timothy came and was put in prison. If so, since Paul was put to death before Nero's own death (June 8, A.D. 68), there is left only the years 67 to 69 A.D. as probable or even possible. It is thus the last of the New Testament books before the Johannine Writings all of which come towards the close of the century and after the destruction of Jerusalem.
rwp@Hebrews: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: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@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:2:21 @{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:1:9 @{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:1:13 @{Which were born} (\hoi egennthsan\). First aorist passive indicative of \genna\, to beget, "who were begotten." By spiritual generation (of God, \ek theou\), not by physical (\ex haimatn\, plural as common in classics and O.T., though why it is not clear unless blood of both father and mother; \ek thelmatos sarkos\, from sexual desire; \ek thelmatos andros\, from the will of the male). But _b_ of the old Latin reads _qui natus est_ and makes it refer to Christ and so expressly teach the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Likewise Irenaeus reads _qui natus est_ as does Tertullian who argues that _qui nati sunt_ (\hoi egennthsan\) is an invention of the Valentinian Gnostics. Blass (_Philology of the Gospels_, p. 234) opposes this reading, but all the old Greek uncials read \hoi egennthsan\ and it must be accepted. The Virgin Birth is doubtless implied in verse 14|, but it is not stated in verse 13|.
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:5:4 @All of this verse is wanting in the oldest and best manuscripts like Aleph B C D W 33 Old Syriac, Coptic versions, Latin Vulgate. It is undoubtedly added, like the clause in verse 3|, to make clearer the statement in verse 7|. Tertullian is the earliest writer to mention it. The Jews explained the healing virtues of the intermittent spring by the ministry of angels. But the periodicity of such angelic visits makes it difficult to believe. It is a relief to many to know that the verse is spurious.
rwp@John:5:39 @{Ye search} (\eraunte\). Proper spelling as the papyri show rather than \ereunte\, the old form (from \ereuna\, search) as in strkjv@7:52|. The form here can be either present active indicative second person plural or the present active imperative second person plural. Only the context can decide. Either makes sense here, but the reason given "because ye think" (\hoti humeis dokeite\, clearly indicative), supports the indicative rather than the imperative. Besides, Jesus is arguing on the basis of their use of "the Scriptures" (\tas graphas\). The plural with the article refers to the well-known collection in the Old Testament (Matthew:21:42; strkjv@Luke:24:27|). Elsewhere in John the singular refers to a particular passage (2:22; strkjv@7:38; strkjv@10:35|). {In them ye have eternal life} (\en autais zn ainion echein\). Indirect assertion after \dokeite\ without "ye" expressed either as nominative (\humeis\) or accusative (\humas\). Bernard holds that in John \doke\ always indicates a mistaken opinion (5:45; strkjv@11:13,31; strkjv@13:29; strkjv@16:20; strkjv@20:15|). Certainly the rabbis did make a mechanical use of the letter of Scripture as a means of salvation. {These are they} (\ekeinai eisin hai\). The true value of the Scriptures is in their witness to Christ (of me, \peri emou\). Luke (24:27,45|) gives this same claim of Jesus, and yet some critics fail to find the Messiah in the Old Testament. But Jesus did.
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:8:39 @{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:8:53 @{Art thou greater than our father Abraham?} (\M su meizn ei tou patros hmn Abraam;\). Negative answer expected by \m\ with ablative case of comparison in \patros\ after \meizn\. The question was designed to put Jesus in a difficult position, for Abraham and the prophets all "died." They do not see that Jesus uses death in a different sense. {Whom makest thou thyself?} (\tina seauton poieis;\). \Seauton\ is predicate accusative with \poieis\. They suspect that Jesus is guilty of blasphemy as they charged in strkjv@5:18| in making himself equal with God. Later they will make it specifically (10:33; strkjv@19:7|). They set a trap for Jesus for this purpose.
rwp@John:8:57 @{Thou art not yet fifty years old} (\pentkonta eti oup echeis\). Literally, "Thou hast not yet fifty years." Not meaning that Jesus was near that age at all. It was the crisis of completed manhood (Numbers:4:3|) and a round number. Jesus was about thirty to thirty-three. {And hast thou seen Abraham?} (\Kai Abraam herakas;\). Songs:A C D and B W Theta have \herakes\, both second person singular of the perfect active indicative of \hora\. But Aleph, Sin-syr., Coptic versions (accepted by Bernard) have \kai Abraam herake se?\ "Has Abraam seen thee?" Either makes sense here.
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:11:27 @{Yea, Lord} (\Nai, kurie\). Martha probably did not understand all that Jesus said and meant, but she did believe in the future resurrection, in eternal life for believers in Christ, in the power of Christ to raise even the dead here and now. She had heroic faith and makes now her own confession of faith in words that outrank those of Peter in strkjv@Matthew:16:16| because she makes hers with her brother dead now four days and with the hope that Jesus will raise him up now. {I have believed} (\pepisteuka\). Perfect active indicative of \pisteu\. It is my settled and firm faith. Peter uses this same tense in strkjv@6:69|. {That thou art the Son of God} (\hoti su ei ho Christos ho huios tou theou\). The Messiah or the Christ (1:41|) was to be also "the Son of God" as the Baptist said he had found Jesus to be (1:34|), as Peter confessed on Hermon for the apostles (Matthew:16:16|), as Jesus claimed to be (John:11:41|) and confessed on oath before Caiaphas that he was (Matthew:26:63f.|), and as John stated that it was his purpose to prove in his Gospel (20:31|). But no one said it under more trying circumstances than Martha. {Even he that cometh into the world} (\ho eis ton kosmon erchomenos\). No "even" in the Greek. This was a popular way of putting the people's expectation (6:14; strkjv@Matthew:11:3|). Jesus himself spoke of his coming into the world (9:39; strkjv@16:28; strkjv@8:37|).
rwp@John:11:43 @{He cried with a loud voice} (\phni megali ekraugasen\). First aorist active indicative of \kraugaz\, old and rare word from \kraug\ (Matthew:25:6|). See strkjv@Matthew:12:19|. Occurs again in strkjv@John:18:40; strkjv@19:6,12|. Only once in the LXX (Ezra:3:13|) and with \phni megali\ (either locative or instrumental case makes sense) as here. For this "elevated (great) voice" see also strkjv@Matthew:24:31; strkjv@Mark:15:34,37; strkjv@Revelation:1:10; strkjv@21:3|. The loud voice was not for the benefit of Lazarus, but for the sake of the crowd standing around that they might see that Lazarus came forth simultaneously with the command of Jesus. {Lazarus, come forth} (\Lazare, deuro ex\). "Hither out." No verb, only the two adverbs, \deuro\ here alone in John. Lazarus heard and obeyed the summons.
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: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@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: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:3:1 @{Now in the fifteenth year} (\en etei de pentekaidekati\). Tiberius Caesar was ruler in the provinces two years before Augustus Caesar died. Luke makes a six-fold attempt here to indicate the time when John the Baptist began his ministry. John revived the function of the prophet (\Ecce Homo\, p. 2|) and it was a momentous event after centuries of prophetic silence. Luke begins with the Roman Emperor, then mentions Pontius Pilate Procurator of Judea, Herod Antipas Tetrarch of Galilee (and Perea), Philip, Tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis, Lysanias, Tetrarch of Abilene (all with the genitive absolute construction) and concludes with the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas (son-in-law and successor of Annas). The ancients did not have our modern system of chronology, the names of rulers as here being the common way. Objection has been made to the mention of Lysanias here because Josephus (_Ant_. XXVII. I) tells of a Lysanias who was King of Abila up to B.C. 36 as the one referred to by Luke with the wrong date. But an inscription has been found on the site of Abilene with mention of "Lysanias the tetrarch" and at the time to which Luke refers (see my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_, pp. 167f.). Songs:Luke is vindicated again by the rocks.
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:7:38 @{Standing behind at his feet} (\stsa opis para tous podas autou\). Second aorist active participle from \histmi\ and intransitive, first aorist \estsa\ being transitive. The guest removed his sandals before the meal and he reclined on the left side with the feet outward. She was standing beside (\para\) his feet {weeping} (\klaiousa\). She was drawn irresistibly by gratitude to Jesus and is overcome with emotion before she can use the ointment; her tears (\tois dakrusin\, instrumental case of \dakru\) take the place of the ointment. {Wiped them with the hair of her head} (\tais thrixin ts kephals auts exemassen\). Inchoative imperfect of an old verb \ekmass\, to rub out or off, began to wipe off, an act of impulse evidently and of embarrassment. "Among the Jews it was a shameful thing for a woman to let down her hair in public; but she makes this sacrifice" (Plummer). Songs:Mary of Bethany wiped the feet of Jesus with her hair (John:12:3|) with a similar sacrifice out of her great love for Jesus. This fact is relied on by some to prove that Mary of Bethany had been a woman of bad character, surely an utter failure to recognize Mary's motive and act. {Kissed} (\katephilei\). Imperfect active of \kataphile\, to kiss repeatedly (force of \kata\), and accented by the tense of continued action here. The word in the N.T. occurs here, of the prodigal's father (15:20|), of the kiss of Judas (Mark:14:45; strkjv@Matthew:26:49|), of the Ephesian elders (Acts:20:37|). " Kissing the feet was a common mark of deep reverence, especially to leading rabbis" (Plummer). {Anointed them with the ointment} (\leiphen ti muri\). Imperfect active again of \aleiph\, a very common verb. \Chri\ has a more religious sense. The anointing came after the burst of emotional excitement.
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: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: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:4:2 @{He taught them} (\edidasken autous\). Imperfect tense describing it as going on. {In parables} (\en parabolais\). As in strkjv@3:23|, only here more extended parables. See on ¯Matthew:13| for discussion concerning Christ's use of parables. Eight are given there, one (the Lamp both in strkjv@Mark:4:21| and strkjv@Luke:8:16| (both Sower and the Lamp in Luke), one alone in strkjv@Mark:4:26-29| (seed growing of itself) not in Matthew or Luke, ten on this occasion. Only four are mentioned in strkjv@Mark:4:1-34| (The Sower, the Lamp, the Seed Growing of Itself, the Mustard Seed). But Mark adds (4:34|) "without a parable spake he not unto them," clearly meaning that Jesus spoke many others on this occasion and Matt. after mentioning eight (Matthew:13:34|) makes the same statement. Manifestly, therefore, Jesus spoke many parables on this day and all theories of exegesis or dispensations on the basis of the number of these kingdom parables are quite beside the mark. In beginning Jesus said: {Hearken} (\Akouete\). It is significant that even Jesus had to ask people to listen when he spoke. See also verse 9|.
rwp@Mark:4:26 @{As if a man should cast} (\hs anthrpos bali\). Note \hs\ with the aorist subjunctive without \an\. It is a supposable case and so the subjunctive and the aorist tense because a single instance. Blass considers this idiom "quite impossible," but it is the true text here and makes good sense (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 968). The more common idiom would have been \hs ean\ (or \an\).
rwp@Mark:4:28 @{Of herself} (\automat\). Automatically, we say. The secret of growth is in the seed, not in the soil nor in the weather nor in the cultivating. These all help, but the seed spontaneously works according to its own nature. The word \automat\ is from \autos\ (self) and \memaa\ desire eagerly from obsolete \ma\. Common word in all Greek history. Only one other example in N.T., in strkjv@Acts:12:10| when the city gate opens to Peter of its own accord. "The mind is adapted to the truth, as the eye to the light" (Gould). Songs:we sow the seed, God's kingdom truth, and the soil (the soul) is ready for the seed. The Holy Spirit works on the heart and uses the seed sown and makes it germinate and grow, "first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear" (\prton chorton, eiten stachun, eiten plr siton en ti stachui\). This is the law and order of nature and also of grace in the kingdom of God. Hence it is worth while to preach and teach. "This single fact creates the confidence shown by Jesus in the ultimate establishment of his kingdom in spite of the obstacles which obstruct its progress" (Gould).
rwp@Mark:5:13 @{And he gave them leave} (\kai epetrepsen autois\). These words present the crucial difficulty for interpreters as to why Jesus allowed the demons to enter the hogs and destroy them instead of sending them back to the abyss. Certainly it was better for hogs to perish than men, but this loss of property raises a difficulty of its own akin to the problem of tornadoes and earthquakes. The question of one man containing so many demons is difficult also, but not much more so than how one demon can dwell in a man and make his home there. One is reminded of the man out of whom a demon was cast, but the demon came back with seven other demons and took possession. Gould thinks that this man with a legion of demons merely makes a historical exaggeration. "I feel as if I were possessed by a thousand devils." That is too easy an explanation. See on ¯Matthew:8:32| for "rushed down the steep." {They were choked} (\epnigonto\). Imperfect tense picturing graphically the disappearance of pig after pig in the sea. strkjv@Luke:8:33| has \apegnig\, {choked off}, constative second aorist passive indicative, treated as a whole, strkjv@Matthew:8:32| merely has "perished" (\apethanon\; died).
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@Info_Matthew @ Matthew was in the habit of keeping accounts and it is quite possible that he took notes of the sayings of Jesus as he heard them. At any rate he gives much attention to the teachings of Jesus as, for instance, the Sermon on the Mount in chapters strkjv@Matthew:5-7|, the parables in strkjv@Matthew:13|, the denunciation of the Pharisees in strkjv@Matthew:23|, the great eschatological discourse in strkjv@Matthew:24; 25|. As a publican in Galilee he was not a narrow Jew and so we do not expect a book prejudiced in favor of the Jews and against the Gentiles. He does seem to show that Jesus is the Messiah of Jewish expectation and hope and so makes frequent quotations from the Old Testament by way of confirmation and illustration. There is no narrow nationalism in Matthew. Jesus is both the Messiah of the Jews and the Saviour of the world.
rwp@Info_Matthew @ THE TITLE The Textus Receptus has "The Holy Gospel according to Matthew" (\to kata Matthaion hagion Euaggelion\), though the Elzevirs omit "holy," not agreeing here with Stephanus, Griesbach, and Scholz. Only minuscules (cursive Greek manuscripts) and all late have the adjective. Other minuscules and nine uncials including W (the Washington Codex of the fifth century), C of the fifth century (the palimpsest manuscript) and Delta of the ninth together with most Latin manuscripts have simply "Gospel according to Matthew" (\Euaggelion kata Matthaion\). But Aleph and B the two oldest and best Greek uncials of the fourth century have only "According to Matthew" (\Kata Maththaion\) (note double th) and the Greek uncial D of the fifth or sixth century follows Aleph and B as do some of the earliest Old Latin manuscripts and the Curetonian Syriac. It is clear, therefore, that the earliest form of the title was simply "According to Matthew." It may be doubted if Matthew (or the author, if not Matthew) had any title at all. The use of "according to" makes it plain that the meaning is not "the Gospel of Matthew," but the Gospel as given by Matthew, \secundum Matthaeum\, to distinguish the report by Matthew from that by Mark, by Luke, by John. Least of all is there any authority in the manuscripts for saying "Saint Matthew," a Roman Catholic practice observed by some Protestants.
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:2:1 @{In the days of Herod the King} (\en hmerais Hridou tou Basiles\). This is the only date for the birth of Christ given by Matthew. Luke gives a more precise date in his Gospel (Luke:2:1-3|), the time of the first enrolment by Augustus and while Cyrenius was ruler of Syria. More will be said of Luke's date when we come to his Gospel. We know from Matthew that Jesus was born while Herod was king, the Herod sometimes called Herod the Great. Josephus makes it plain that Herod died B.C. 4. He was first Governor of Galilee, but had been king of Judaea since B.C. 40 (by Antony and Octavius). I call him "Herod the Great Pervert" in _Some Minor Characters in the New Testament_. He was great in sin and in cruelty and had won the favour of the Emperor. The story in Josephus is a tragedy. It is not made plain by Matthew how long before the death of Herod Jesus was born. Our traditional date A.D. 1, is certainly wrong as Matthew shows. It seems plain that the birth of Jesus cannot be put later than B.C. 5. The data supplied by Luke probably call for B.C. 6 or 7.
rwp@Matthew:2:16 @{Slew all the male children that were in Bethlehem} (\aneilen pantas tous paidas tous en Bthleem\). The flight of Joseph was justified, for Herod was violently enraged (\ethumth lian\) that he had been mocked by the Magi, deluded in fact (\enepaichth\). Vulgate _illusus esset_. Herod did not know, of course, how old the child was, but he took no chances and included all the little boys (\tous paidas\, masculine article) in Bethlehem two years old and under, perhaps fifteen or twenty. It is no surprise that Josephus makes no note of this small item in Herod's chamber of horrors. It was another fulfilment of the prophecy in strkjv@Jeremiah:31:15|. The quotation (2:18|) seems to be from the Septuagint. It was originally written of the Babylonian captivity but it has a striking illustration in this case also. Macrobius (_Sat_. II. iv. II) notes that Augustus said that it was better to be Herod's sow (\hus\) than his son (\huios\), for the sow had a better chance of life.
rwp@Matthew:3:1 @{And in those days cometh John the Baptist} (\en de tais hmerais paraginetai Ians ho Baptists\). Here the synoptic narrative begins with the baptism of John (Mt. strkjv@3:1; strkjv@Mark:1:2; strkjv@Luke:3:1|) as given by Peter in strkjv@Acts:1:22|, "from the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received up from us" (cf. also strkjv@Acts:10:37-43|, Peter's summary to Cornelius very much like the outline of Mark's Gospel). Matthew does not indicate the date when John appeared as Luke does in ch. 3 (the fifteenth year of Tiberius's reign). It was some thirty years after the birth of John, precisely how long after the return of Joseph and Mary to Nazareth we do not know. Moffatt translates the verb (\paraginetai\) "came on the scene," but it is the historical present and calls for a vivid imagination on the part of the reader. There he is as he comes forward, makes his appearance. His name John means "Gift of Jehovah" (cf. German _Gotthold_) and is a shortened form of Johanan. He is described as "the Baptist," "the Baptizer" for that is the rite that distinguishes him. The Jews probably had proselyte baptism as I. Abrahams shows (_Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels_, p. 37). But this rite was meant for the Gentiles who accepted Judaism. John is treating the Jews as Gentiles in demanding baptism at their hands on the basis of repentance.
rwp@Matthew:3:16 @{The Spirit of God descending as a dove} (\pneuma theou katabainon hsei peristeran\). It is not certain whether Matthew means that the Spirit of God took the form of a dove or came upon Jesus as a dove comes down. Either makes sense, but Luke (Luke:3:22|) has it "in bodily form as a dove" and that is probably the idea here. The dove in Christian art has been considered the symbol of the Holy Spirit.
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:10:13 @{If the house be worthy} (\ean i h oikia axia\). Third class condition. What makes a house worthy? "It would naturally be readiness to receive the preachers and their message" (McNeile). Hospitality is one of the noblest graces and preachers receive their share of it. The apostles are not to be burdensome as guests.
rwp@Matthew:11:12 @{Suffereth violence} (\biazetai\). This verb occurs only here and in strkjv@Luke:16:16| in the N.T. It seems to be middle in Luke and Deissmann (_Bible Studies_, p. 258) quotes an inscription "where \biazomai\ is without doubt reflexive and absolute" as in strkjv@Luke:16:16|. But there are numerous papyri examples where it is passive (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_, etc.) so that "there seems little that promises decisive help for the difficult Logion of strkjv@Matthew:11:12; strkjv@Luke:16:16|." Songs:then in strkjv@Matthew:11:12| the form can be either middle or passive and either makes sense, though a different sense. The passive idea is that the kingdom is forced, is stormed, is taken by men of violence like "men of violence take it by force" (\biastai harpazousin autn\) or seize it like a conquered city. The middle voice may mean "experiences violence" or "forces its way" like a rushing mighty wind (so Zahn holds). These difficult words of Jesus mean that the preaching of John "had led to a violent and impetuous thronging to gather round Jesus and his disciples" (Hort, _Judaistic Christianity_, p. 26).
rwp@Matthew:11:20 @{Most of his mighty works} (\hai pleistai dunameis autou\). Literally, "His very many mighty works" if elative as usual in the papyri (Moulton, _Prolegomena_, p. 79; Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 670). But the usual superlative makes sense here as the Canterbury translation has it. This word \dunamis\ for miracle presents the notion of _power_ like our _dynamite_. The word \teras\ is wonder, portent, _miraculum_ (miracle) as in strkjv@Acts:2:19|. It occurs only in the plural and always with \smeia\. The word \smeion\ means sign (Matthew:12:38|) and is very common in John's Gospel as well as the word \ergon\ (work) as in strkjv@John:5:36|. Other words used are \paradoxon\, our word _paradox_, strange (Luke:5:26|), \endoxon\, glorious (Luke:13:17|), \thaumasion\, wonderful (Matthew:21:15|).
rwp@Matthew:15:11 @{This defileth the man} (\touto koinoi ton anthrpon\). This word is from \koinos\ which is used in two senses, either what is "common" to all and general like the _Koin_ Greek, or what is unclean and "common" either ceremonially or in reality. The ceremonial "commonness" disturbed Peter on the housetop in Joppa (Acts:10:14|). See also strkjv@Acts:21:28; strkjv@Hebrews:9:13|. One who is thus religiously common or unclean is cut off from doing his religious acts. "Defilement" was a grave issue with the rabbinical ceremonialists. Jesus appeals to the crowd here: {Hear and understand} (\akouete kai suniete\). He has a profound distinction to draw. Moral uncleanness is what makes a man common, defiles him. That is what is to be dreaded, not to be glossed over. "This goes beyond the tradition of the elders and virtually abrogates the Levitical distinctions between clean and unclean" (Bruce). One can see the pettifogging pretenders shrivel up under these withering words.
rwp@Matthew:15:24 @{I was not sent} (\ouk apestaln\). Second aorist passive indicative of \apostell\. Jesus takes a new turn with this woman in Phoenicia. He makes a test case of her request. In a way she represented the problem of the Gentile world. He calls the Jews "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" in spite of the conduct of the Pharisees.
rwp@Matthew:16:1 @{The Pharisees and Sadducees} (\hoi Pharisaioi kai Saddoukaioi\). The first time that we have this combination of the two parties who disliked each other exceedingly. Hate makes strange bedfellows. They hated Jesus more than they did each other. Their hostility has not decreased during the absence of Jesus, but rather increased. {Tempting him} (\peirazontes\). Their motive was bad. {A sign from heaven} (\smeion ek tou ouranou\). The scribes and Pharisees had already asked for a sign (12:38|). Now this new combination adds "from heaven." What did they have in mind? They may not have had any definite idea to embarrass Jesus. The Jewish apocalypses did speak of spectacular displays of power by the Son of Man (the Messiah). The devil had suggested that Jesus let the people see him drop down from the pinnacle of the temple and the people expected the Messiah to come from an unknown source (John:7:27|) who would do great signs (John:7:31|). Chrysostom (_Hom_. liii.) suggests stopping the course of the sun, bridling the moon, a clap of thunder.
rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{And I also say unto thee} (\k'ag de soi leg\). "The emphasis is not on 'Thou art Peter' over against 'Thou art the Christ,' but on \Kag\: 'The Father hath revealed to thee one truth, and I also tell you another" (McNeile). Jesus calls Peter here by the name that he had said he would have (John:1:42|). Peter (\Petros\) is simply the Greek word for Cephas (Aramaic). Then it was prophecy, now it is fact. In verse 17| Jesus addresses him as "Simon Bar-Jonah," his full patronymic (Aramaic) name. But Jesus has a purpose now in using his nickname "Peter" which he had himself given him. Jesus makes a remarkable play on Peter's name, a pun in fact, that has caused volumes of controversy and endless theological strife. {On this rock} (\epi tauti ti petri\) Jesus says, a ledge or cliff of rock like that in strkjv@7:24| on which the wise man built his house. \Petros\ is usually a smaller detachment of the massive ledge. But too much must not be made of this point since Jesus probably spoke Aramaic to Peter which draws no such distinction (\Kph\). What did Jesus mean by this word-play?
rwp@Matthew:16:18 @{The gates of Hades} (\pulai hidou\) {shall not prevail against it} (\ou katischusousin auts\). Each word here creates difficulty. Hades is technically the unseen world, the Hebrew Sheol, the land of the departed, that is death. Paul uses \thanate\ in strkjv@1Corinthians:15:55| in quoting strkjv@Hosea:13:14| for \hid\. It is not common in the papyri, but it is common on tombstones in Asia Minor, "doubtless a survival of its use in the old Greek religion" (Moulton and Milligan, _Vocabulary_). The ancient pagans divided Hades (\a\ privative and \idein\, to see, abode of the unseen) into Elysium and Tartarus as the Jews put both Abraham's bosom and Gehenna in Sheol or Hades (cf. strkjv@Luke:16:25|). Christ was in Hades (Acts:2:27,31|), not in Gehenna. We have here the figure of two buildings, the Church of Christ on the Rock, the House of Death (Hades). "In the Old Testament the 'gates of Hades' (Sheol) never bears any other meaning (Isaiah:38:10|; Wisd. strkjv@16:3; 3Macc. strkjv@5:51) than death," McNeile claims. See also strkjv@Psalms:9:13; strkjv@107:18; strkjv@Job:38:17| (\pulai thanatou pulroi hidou\). It is not the picture of Hades _attacking_ Christ's church, but of death's possible victory over the church. "The \ekklsia\ is built upon the Messiahship of her master, and death, the gates of Hades, will not prevail against her by keeping Him imprisoned. It was a mysterious truth, which He will soon tell them in plain words (verse 21|); it is echoed in strkjv@Acts:2:24,31|" (McNeile). Christ's church will prevail and survive because He will burst the gates of Hades and come forth conqueror. He will ever live and be the guarantor of the perpetuity of His people or church. The verb \katischu\ (literally have strength against, \ischu\ from \ischus\ and \kat-\) occurs also in strkjv@Luke:21:36; strkjv@23:23|. It appears in the ancient Greek, the LXX, and in the papyri with the accusative and is used in the modern Greek with the sense of gaining the mastery over. The wealth of imagery in strkjv@Matthew:16:18| makes it difficult to decide each detail, but the main point is clear. The \ekklsia\ which consists of those confessing Christ as Peter has just done will not cease. The gates of Hades or bars of Sheol will not close down on it. Christ will rise and will keep his church alive. _Sublime Porte_ used to be the title of Turkish power in Constantinople.
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:18:14 @{The will of your Father} (\thelma emprosthen\). Observe that Westcott and Hort read \mou\ here rather than \hmn\ after B Sahidic Coptic. Either makes good sense, though "your" carries on the picture of God's care for "each one of these little ones" (\hen tn mikrn toutn\) among God's children. The use of \emprosthen\ with \thelma\ is a Hebraism like \emprosthen sou\ in strkjv@11:25| with \eudokia\, "before the face" of God.
rwp@Matthew:18:22 @{Until seventy times seven} (\hes hebdomkontakis hepta\). It is not clear whether this idiom means seventy-seven or as the Revised Version has it (490 times). If \heptakis\ were written it would clearly be 490 times. The same ambiguity is seen in strkjv@Genesis:4:24|, the LXX text by omitting \kai\. In the _Test. of the Twelve Patriarchs, Benj._ vii. 4, it is used in the sense of seventy times seven. But it really makes little difference because Jesus clearly means unlimited forgiveness in either case. "The unlimited revenge of primitive man has given place to the unlimited forgiveness of Christians" (McNeile).
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:25:15 @{To one} (\hi men, hi de, hi de\). Demonstrative \hos\, not the relative. Neat Greek idiom. {According to his several ability} (\kata tn idian dunamin\). According to his own ability. Each had all that he was capable of handling. The use that one makes of his opportunities is the measure of his capacity for more. One talent represented a considerable amount of money at that time when a \denarius\ was a day's wage. See on ¯18:24| for the value of a talent.
rwp@Matthew:26:28 @{The Covenant} (\ts diathks\). The adjective \kains\ in Textus Receptus is not genuine. The covenant is an agreement or contract between two (\dia, duo, thke\, from \tithmi\). It is used also for will (Latin, _testamentum_) which becomes operative at death (Hebrews:9:15-17|). Hence our _New Testament_. Either covenant or will makes sense here. Covenant is the idea in strkjv@Hebrews:7:22; strkjv@8:8| and often. In the Hebrew to make a covenant was to cut up the sacrifice and so ratify the agreement (Genesis:15:9-18|). Lightfoot argues that the word \diathke\ means covenant in the N.T. except in strkjv@Hebrews:9:15-17|. Jesus here uses the solemn words of strkjv@Exodus:24:8| "the blood of the covenant" at Sinai. "My blood of the covenant" is in contrast with that. This is the New Covenant of strkjv@Jeremiah:31; strkjv@Hebrews:8|. {Which is shed for many} (\to peri polln ekchunnomenon\). A prophetic present passive participle. The act is symbolized by the ordinance. Cf. the purpose of Christ expressed in strkjv@20:28|. There \anti\ and here \peri\. {Unto remission of sins} (\eis aphesin hamartin\). This clause is in Matthew alone but it is not to be restricted for that reason. It is the truth. This passage answers all the modern sentimentalism that finds in the teaching of Jesus only pious ethical remarks or eschatological dreamings. He had the definite conception of his death on the cross as the basis of forgiveness of sin. The purpose of the shedding of his blood of the New Covenant was precisely to remove (forgive) sins.
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: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@Revelation:6:4 @{A red horse} (\hippos purros\). Old adjective from \pur\ (fire), flame-coloured, blood-red (2Kings:3:22|), in N.T. only here and strkjv@12:3|, like strkjv@Zechariah:1:8; strkjv@6:2| (roan horse). {To take peace from the earth} (\labein tn eirnn ek ts gs\). Second aorist active infinitive of \lamban\, and here the nominative case, the subject of \edoth\ (see verse 2|), "to take peace out of the earth." Alas, how many red horses have been ridden through the ages. {And that they should slay one another} (\kai hina alllous sphaxousin\). Epexegetical explanatory purpose clause with \hina\ and the future active of \sphaz\ (5:6|) instead of the more usual subjunctive (verse 2|). Cf. Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 998f. This is what war does to perfection, makes cannon fodder (cf. strkjv@John:14:27|) of men. {A great sword} (\machaira megal\). \Machaira\ may be a knife carried in a sheath at the girdle (John:18:10|) or a long sword in battle as here. \Romphaia\, also a large sword, is the only other word for sword in the N.T. (Revelation:1:16; strkjv@2:12,16; strkjv@6:8; strkjv@19:15,21|).
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@Revelation:12:1 @{A great sign} (\smeion mega\). The first of the visions to be so described (13:3; strkjv@15:1|), and it is introduced by \phth\ as in strkjv@11:19; strkjv@12:3|, not by \meta tauto\ or by \eidon\ or by \eidon kai idou\ as heretofore. This "sign" is really a \teras\ (wonder), as it is so by association in strkjv@Matthew:24:24; strkjv@John:4:48; strkjv@Acts:2:22; strkjv@5:12|. The element of wonder is not in the word \smeion\ as in \teras\, but often in the thing itself as in strkjv@Luke:21:11; strkjv@John:9:16; strkjv@Revelation:13:13ff.; strkjv@15:1; strkjv@16:14; strkjv@19:20|. {A woman} (\gun\). Nominative case in apposition with \smeion\. "The first 'sign in heaven' is a Woman--the earliest appearance of a female figure in the Apocalyptic vision" (Swete). {Arrayed with the sun} (\peribeblmen ton hlion\). Perfect passive participle of \periball\, with the accusative retained as so often (9 times) in the Apocalypse. Both Charles and Moffatt see mythological ideas and sources behind the bold imagery here that leave us all at sea. Swete understands the Woman to be "the church of the Old Testament" as "the Mother of whom Christ came after the flesh. But here, as everywhere in the Book, no sharp dividing line is drawn between the Church of the Old Testament and the Christian Society." Certainly she is not the Virgin Mary, as verse 17| makes clear. Beckwith takes her to be "the heavenly representative of the people of God, the _ideal_ Zion, which, so far as it is embodied in concrete realities, is represented alike by the people of the Old and the New Covenants." John may have in mind strkjv@Isaiah:7:14| (Matthew:1:23; strkjv@Luke:1:31|) as well as strkjv@Micah:4:10; strkjv@Isaiah:26:17f.; strkjv@66:7| without a definite picture of Mary. The metaphor of childbirth is common enough (John:16:21; strkjv@Galatians:4:19|). The figure is a bold one with the moon "under her feet" (\hupokat tn podn auts\) and "a crown of twelve stars" (\stephanos astern ddeka\), a possible allusion to the twelve tribes (James:1:1; strkjv@Revelation:21:12|) or to the twelve apostles (Revelation:21:14|).
rwp@Revelation:12:11 @{They overcame him} (\autoi eniksan\). First aorist active indicative of \nika\, the verb used by Jesus of his own victory (John:16:33|) and about him (Revelation:3:21; strkjv@5:5|). "The victory of the martyrs marks the failure of Satan's endeavours" (Swete). {Because of the blood of the Lamb} (\dia to haima tou arniou\). As in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:6,9; strkjv@7:14|. The blood of Christ is here presented by \dia\ as the ground for the victory and not the means, as by \en\ in strkjv@1:5; strkjv@5:9|. Both ideas are true, but \dia\ with the accusative gives only the reason. The blood of Christ does cleanse us from sin (John:1:29; strkjv@1John:1:7|). Christ conquered Satan, and so makes our victory possible (Luke:11:21f.; strkjv@Hebrews:2:18|). "Thus the Lamb is the true \sungoros\ (like Michael) of the New Israel, its \parakltos pros ton patera\ (1John:2:1|)" (Swete). {Because of the Word of their testimony} (\dia ton logon ts marturias autn\). The same use of \dia\, "because of their testimony to Jesus" as in John's own case in strkjv@1:9|. These martyrs have been true to their part. {They loved not their life even unto death} (\ouk gapsan ten psuchn autn achri thanatou\). First aorist active indicative of \agapa\. They did resist "unto blood" (\mechris haimatos\ strkjv@Hebrews:12:4|) and did not put their own lives before loyalty to Christ. There is a direct reference to the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:12:25| as illustrated also in strkjv@Mark:8:35; strkjv@Matthew:10:39; strkjv@16:25; strkjv@Luke:9:24; strkjv@17:33|. Paul's own example is pertinent (Acts:21:13; strkjv@Phillipians:1:20ff.|). Jesus himself had been "obedient unto death" (Phillipians:2:8|). These martyrs seem to be still alive on earth, but their heroism is proleptically pictured.
rwp@Revelation:13:8 @{Shall worship him} (\proskunsousin auton\). Future active of \proskune\ with the accusative here as some MSS. in strkjv@13:4| (\to thrion\), both constructions in this book. {Whose} (\hou--autou\). Redundant use of genitive \autou\ (his) with \hou\ (whose) as common in this book, and singular instead of plural \hn\ with antecedent \pantes\ (all, plural), thus calling attention to the responsibility of the individual in emperor-worship. {Hath not been written} (\ou gegraptai\). Perfect passive indicative of \graph\, permanent state, stands written. {In the book of life of the Lamb} (\en ti biblii ts zs tou arniou\). See strkjv@3:5| for this phrase and the O.T. references. It occurs again in strkjv@17:8; strkjv@20:12,15; strkjv@21:27|. "Here and in strkjv@21:27|, the Divine Register is represented as belonging to 'the Lamb that was slain'" (Swete). {That hath been slain from the foundation of the world} (\tou esphagmenou\ (for which see strkjv@5:6|) \apo katabols kosmou\). For the phrase \apo katabols kosmou\ (not in the LXX) there are six other N.T. uses (Matthew:13:35| without \kosmou\; strkjv@25:34; strkjv@Luke:11:50; strkjv@Hebrews:4:3; strkjv@9:26; strkjv@Revelation:17:8|), and for \pro katabols kosmou\ three (John:17:24; strkjv@Ephesians:1:4; strkjv@1Peter:1:20|). It is doubtful here whether it is to be taken with \tou esphagmenou\ (cf. strkjv@1Peter:1:20|) or with \gegraptai\ as in strkjv@Revelation:17:8|. Either makes sense, and here the most natural use is with \esphagmenou\. At any rate the death of Christ lies in the purpose of God, as in strkjv@John:3:16|.
rwp@Revelation:18:17 @{Shipmaster} (\kubernts\). Old word (from \kuberna\, to steer), helmsman, sailing-master, in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:27:11|. Subordinate to the \nauklros\ (supreme commander). {That saileth any whither} (\ho epi topon plen\). "The one sailing to a place." See strkjv@Acts:27:2|, \tous kata tn Asian pleontas\ (those sailing down along Asia). Nestle suggests \ponton\ (sea) here for \topon\ (place), but it makes sense as it is. {Mariners} (\nautai\). Old word (from \naus\, ship), in N.T. only here and strkjv@Acts:27:27,30|. {Gain their living by the sea} (\tn thalassan ergazontai\). "Work the sea." This idiom is as old as Hesiod for sailors, fishermen, etc. See verses 10,15|.
rwp@Revelation:19:11 @{The heaven opened} (\ton ouranon neigmenon\). Perfect passive participle (triple reduplication) of \anoig\. Accusative case after \eidon\. Songs:Ezekiel (1:1|) begins his prophecy. See also the baptism of Jesus (Matthew:3:16; strkjv@Luke:3:21|, but \schizomenous\ in strkjv@Mark:1:10|). Jesus predicted the opened heavens to Nathanael (John:1:51|). In strkjv@Revelation:4:1| a door is opened in heaven, the sanctuary is opened (11:19; strkjv@15:5|), angels come out of heaven (10:1; strkjv@14:17; strkjv@18:1|), and sounds come from heaven (19:1|). {Behold, a white horse} (\idou hippos leukos\). Nominative case because of \idou\, not \eidon\. Cf. strkjv@6:2| for \hippos leukos\. The emblem of victory in both cases, but the riders are very different. Here it is the Messiah who is the Warrior, as is made plain by "Faithful and True" (\pistos kai althinos\), epithets already applied to Christ (1:5; strkjv@3:7,14|). Cf. also strkjv@22:6|. {In righteousness he doth judge and make war} (\en dikaiosuni krinei kai polemei\). See strkjv@Isaiah:11:3ff|. The Messiah is both Judge and Warrior, but he does both in righteousness (15:3; strkjv@16:5,7; strkjv@19:2|). He passes judgment on the beast (antichrist) and makes war on him. Satan had offered Christ a victory of compromise which was rejected.
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: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:8:28 @{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|).
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}