Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-PROPHET.filter - rwp Smith:

rwp@1John:3:16 @{Know we} (\egnkamen\). Perfect active indicative, "we have come to know and still know." See strkjv@2:3| for "hereby" (\en touti\). {Love} (\tn agapn\). "The thing called love" (D. Smith). {He for us} (\ekeinos huper hmn\). \Ekeinos\ as in strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:3,5|, \huper\ here alone in this Epistle, though common in John's Gospel (10:11,15; strkjv@11:50|, etc.) and in strkjv@3John:1:7|. {Laid down his life} (\tn psuchn autou ethken\). First aorist active indicative of \tithmi\, the very idiom used by Jesus of himself in strkjv@John:10:11,17f|. {We ought} (\hmeis opheilomen\). Emphatic \hmeis\ again. For \opheil\ see strkjv@2:6|. Of course our laying down our lives for the brethren has no atoning value in our cases as in that of Christ, but is a supreme proof of one's love (John:13:37f.; strkjv@15:13|), as often happens.

rwp@1John:4:17 @{Herein} (\en touti\). It is not clear whether the \hina\ clause (sub-final use) is in apposition with \en touti\ as in strkjv@John:15:8| or the \hoti\ clause (because) with the \hina\ clause as parenthesis. Either makes sense. Westcott argues for the latter idea, which is reinforced by the preceding sentence. {With us} (\meth' hmn\). Construed with the verb \teteleitai\ (is perfected). In contrast to \en hmin\ (verses 12,16|), emphasising cooperation. "God works with man" (Westcott). For boldness (\parrsian\) in the day of judgment (only here with both articles, but often with no articles as in strkjv@2Peter:2:9|) see strkjv@2:28|. {As he is} (\kaths ekeinos estin\). That is Christ as in strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:3,5,7,16|. Same tense (present) as in strkjv@3:7|. "Love is a heavenly visitant" (David Smith). We are in this world to manifest Christ.

rwp@1John:5:4 @{For} (\hoti\). The reason why God's commandments are not heavy is the power that comes with the new birth from God. {Whatsoever is begotten of God} (\pn to gegennmenon ek tou theou\). Neuter singular perfect passive participle of \genna\ rather than the masculine singular (verse 1|) to express sharply the universality of the principle (Rothe) as in strkjv@John:3:6,8; strkjv@6:37,39|. {Overcometh the world} (\niki ton kosmon\). Present active indicative of \nika\, a continuous victory because a continuous struggle, "keeps on conquering the world" ("the sum of all the forces antagonistic to the spiritual life," D. Smith). {This is the victory} (\haut estin h nik\). For this form of expression see strkjv@1:5; strkjv@John:1:19|. \Nik\ (victory, cf. \nika\), old word, here alone in N.T., but the later form \nikos\ in strkjv@Matthew:12:20; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:54f.,57|. {That overcometh} (\h niksasa\). First aorist active articular participle of \nika\. The English cannot reproduce the play on the word here. The aorist tense singles out an individual experience when one believed or when one met temptation with victory. Jesus won the victory over the world (John:16:33|) and God in us (1John:4:4|) gives us the victory. {Even our faith} (\h pistis hmn\). The only instance of \pistis\ in the Johannine Epistles (not in John's Gospel, though in the Apocalypse). It is our faith in Jesus Christ as shown by our confession (verse 1|) and by our life (verse 2|).

rwp@1John:5:15 @{And if we know} (\kai ean oidamen\). Condition of first class with \ean\ (usually \ei\) and the perfect active indicative, assumed as true. See strkjv@1Thessalonians:3:8; strkjv@Acts:8:31| for the indicative with \ean\ as in the papyri. "An amplification of the second limitation" (D. Smith). {Whatsoever we ask} (\ho ean aitmetha\). Indefinite relative clause with modal \ean\ (=\an\) and the present middle (as for ourselves) subjunctive of \aite\. This clause, like \hmn\, is also the object of \akouei\. {We know that we have} (\oidamen hoti echomen\). Repetition of \oidamen\, the confidence of possession by anticipation. {The petitions} (\ta aitmata\). Old word, from \aite\, requests, here only in John, elsewhere in N.T. strkjv@Luke:23:24; strkjv@Phillipians:4:6|. We have the answer already as in strkjv@Mark:11:24|. {We have asked} (\itkamen\). Perfect active indicative of \aite\, the asking abiding.

rwp@2John:1:3 @{Shall be with us} (\estai meth' hmn\). He picks up the words before in reverse order. Future indicative here, not a wish with the optative (\eie\) as we have in strkjv@1Peter:1:2; strkjv@2Peter:1:2|. The salutation is like that in the Pastoral Epistles: "\Charis\, the wellspring in the heart of God; \eleos\, its outpourings; \eirn\, its blessed effect" (David Smith). {And from Jesus Christ} (\kai para Isou Christou\). The repetition of \para\ (with the ablative) is unique. "It serves to bring out distinctly the twofold personal relation of man to the Father and to the Son" (Westcott). "The Fatherhood of God, as revealed by one who being His Son _can_ reveal the Father, and who as man (\Isou\) can make him known to men" (Brooke).

rwp@2John:1:4 @{I rejoice} (\echarn\). Second aorist passive of \chair\ as in strkjv@3John:1:3|, "of a glad surprise" (D. Smith), as in strkjv@Mark:14:11|, over the discovery about the blessing of their godly home on these lads. {Greatly} (\lian\). Only here and strkjv@3John:1:3| in John's writings. {I have found} (\heurka\). Perfect active indicative of \heurisk\ as in strkjv@John:1:41|, our "eureka," here with its usual force, a continued discovery. "He sits down at once and writes to Kyria. How glad she would be that her lads, far away in the great city, were true to their early faith" (David Smith). {Certain of thy children} (\ek tn teknn\). No \tinas\ as one would expect before \ek\, a not infrequent idiom in the N.T. (John:16:17|). {Walking} (\peripatountas\). Present active accusative supplementary participle agreeing with \tinas\ understood. Probably members of the church off here in Ephesus. {In truth} (\en altheii\). As in verse 1; strkjv@3John:1:4|. {We received} (\elabomen\). Second aorist active (possibly, though not certainly, literary plural) of \lamban\. This very idiom (\entoln lamban\) in strkjv@John:10:18; strkjv@Acts:17:15; Co strkjv@4:10|. Perhaps the reference here is to strkjv@1John:2:7f.; strkjv@3:23|.

rwp@2Timothy:4:14 @{Alexander the coppersmith} (\Alexandros ho chalkeus\). Old word, only here in N.T., for metal-worker (copper, iron, gold, etc.). Possibly the one in strkjv@1:20|, but not the one in strkjv@Acts:19:33f.| unless he afterwards became a Christian. {Did me much evil} (\moi kaka enedeixato\). Evidently he had some personal dislike towards Paul and possibly also he was a Gnostic. {Will render} (\apodsei\). Future active of the same verb used in verse 8|, but with a very different atmosphere.

rwp@3John:1:12 @{Demetrius hath the witness of all men} (\Dmtrii memarturtai hupo pantn\). Perfect passive indicative of \marture\, "it has been witnessed to Demetrius (dative case) by all." We know nothing else about him, unless, as is unlikely, he be identified with Demas as a shortened form (Philemon:1:24; strkjv@Colossians:4:4; strkjv@2Timothy:4:10|), who has come back after his desertion or with the Ephesian silversmith (Acts:19:21ff.|), who may have been converted under John's ministry, which one would like to believe, though there is no evidence for it. He may indeed be the bearer of this letter from Ephesus to Gaius and may also have come under suspicion for some reason and hence John's warm commendation. {And of the truth itself} (\kai hupo auts ts altheias\). A second commendation of Demetrius. It is possible, in view of strkjv@1John:5:6| (the Spirit is the truth), that John means the Holy Spirit and not a mere personification of the truth. {Yea we also} (\kai hmeis de\). A third witness to Demetrius, that is John himself (literary plural). {Thou knowest} (\oidas\). "The words in strkjv@John:21:24| sound like an echo of this sentence" (Westcott). John knew Demetrius well in Ephesus.

rwp@Acts:19:24 @{Demetrius, a silversmith} (\Dmtrios argurokopos\). The name is common enough and may or may not be the man mentioned in strkjv@3John:1:12| who was also from the neighbourhood of Ephesus. There is on an inscription at Ephesus near the close of the century a Demetrius called \neopoios Artemidos\ a temple warden of Artemis (Diana). Zoeckler suggests that Luke misunderstood this word \neopoios\ and translated it into \argurokopos\, a beater (\kopt\, to beat) of silver (\arguros\, silver), "which made silver shrines of Artemis" (\poin naous\ (\argurous\) \Artemidos\). It is true that no silver shrines of the temple have been found in Ephesus, but only numerous terra-cotta ones. Ramsay suggests that the silver ones would naturally be melted down. The date is too late anyhow to identify the Demetrius who was \neopoios\ with the Demetrius \argurokopos\ who made little silver temples of Artemis, though B does not have the word \argurous\. The poor votaries would buy the terra-cotta ones, the rich the silver shrines (Ramsay, _Paul the Traveller_, p. 278). These small models of the temple with the statue of Artemis inside would be set up in the houses or even worn as amulets. It is a pity that the Revised Version renders Artemis here. Diana as the Ephesian Artemis is quite distinct from the Greek Artemis, the sister of Apollo, the Diana of the Romans. This temple, built in the 6th century B.C., was burnt by Herostratus Oct. 13 B.C. 356, the night when Alexander the Great was born. It was restored and was considered one of the seven wonders of the world. Artemis was worshipped as the goddess of fertility, like the Lydian Cybele, a figure with many breasts. The great festival in May would offer Demetrius a golden opportunity for the sale of the shrines. {Brought no little business} (\pareicheto ouk olign ergasian\). Imperfect middle, continued to bring (furnish, provide). The middle accents the part that Demetrius played as the leader of the guild of silversmiths, work for himself and for them. {Unto the craftsmen} (\tais technitais\). The artisans from \techn\ (craft, art). Trade guilds were common in the ancient world. Demetrius had probably organized this guild and provided the capital for the enterprise.

rwp@Acts:19:33 @{And they brought Alexander out of the crowd} (\ek de tou ochlou sunebibasan Alexandron\). The correct text (Aleph A B) has this verb \sunebibasan\ (from \sunbibaz\, to put together) instead of \proebibasan\ (from \probibaz\, to put forward). It is a graphic word, causal of \bain\, to go, and occurs in strkjv@Acts:16:10; strkjv@Colossians:2:19; strkjv@Ephesians:4:16|. Evidently some of the Jews grew afraid that the mob would turn on the Jews as well as on the Christians. Paul was a Jew and so was Aristarchus, one of the prisoners. The Jews were as strongly opposed to idolatry as were the Christians. {The Jews putting him forward} (\probalontn auton tn Ioudain\). Genitive absolute of the second aorist active participle of \proball\, old verb to push forward as leaves in the spring (Luke:21:30|). In the N.T. only in these two passages. Alexandria had already disgraceful scenes of Jew-baiting and there was real peril now in Ephesus with this wild mob. Songs:Alexander was pushed forward as the champion to defend the Jews to the excited mob. He may be the same Alexander the coppersmith who did Paul much evil (2Timothy:4:14|), against whom Paul will warn Timothy then in Ephesus. "The Jews were likely to deal in the copper and silver required for the shrines, so he may have had some trade connexion with the craftsmen which would give him influence" (Furneaux). {Beckoned with the hand} (\kataseisas tn cheira\). Old verb \katasei\, to shake down, here the hand, rapidly waving the hand up and down to get a hearing. In the N.T. elsewhere only in strkjv@Acts:12:17; strkjv@13:16; strkjv@21:40| where "with the hand" (\ti cheiri\, instrumental case) is used instead of \tn cheira\ (the accusative). {Would have made a defence unto the people} (\thelen apologeisthai ti dmi\). Imperfect active, wanted to make a defence, tried to, started to, but apparently never got out a word. \Apologeisthai\ (present middle infinitive, direct middle, to defend oneself), regular word for formal apology, but in N.T. only by Luke and Paul (twice in Gospel, six times in Acts, and in strkjv@Romans:2:15; strkjv@2Corinthians:12:19|).

rwp@Acts:21:27 @{The seven days} (\hai hepta hmerai\). For which Paul had taken the vow, though there may be an allusion to the pentecostal week for which Paul had desired to be present (20:16|). There is no necessary connexion with the vow in strkjv@18:15|. In strkjv@24:17| Paul makes a general reference to his purpose in coming to Jerusalem to bring alms and offerings (\prosphoras\, sacrifices). Paul spent seven days in Troas (20:6|), Tyre (21:4|), and had planned for seven here if not more. It was on the last of the seven days when Paul was completing his offerings about the vows on all five that the incident occurred that was to make him a prisoner for five years. {When they saw him in the temple} (\theasamenoi auton en ti hieri\). First aorist middle participle of \theaomai\ (from \thea\, a view, cf. theatre) to behold. In the very act of honouring the temple these Jews from Asia raise a hue and cry that he is dishonouring it. Paul was not known by face now to many of the Jerusalem Jews, though once the leader of the persecution after the death of Stephen and the outstanding young Jew of the day. But the Jews in Ephesus knew him only too well, some of whom are here at the pentecostal feast. They had plotted against him in Ephesus to no purpose (Acts:19:23-41; strkjv@20:19|), but now a new opportunity had come. It is possible that the cry was led by Alexander put forward by the Jews in Ephesus (19:33|) who may be the same as Alexander the coppersmith who did Paul so much harm (2Timothy:4:14|). Paul was not in the inner sanctuary (\ho naos\), but only in the outer courts (\to hieron\). {Stirred up all the multitude} (\sunecheon panta ton ochlon\). Imperfect (kept on) active of \sunche\ or \sunchun\ (\-unn\), to pour together, to confuse as in strkjv@Acts:2:6; strkjv@9:22; strkjv@19:31,32; strkjv@21:31| and here to stir up by the same sort of confusion created by Demetrius in Ephesus where the same word is used twice (19:31,32|). The Jews from Ephesus had learned it from Demetrius the silversmith. {Laid hands on him} (\epebalan ep' auton tas cheiras\). Second aorist (ingressive, with endings of the first aorist, \-an\) active indicative of \epiball\, old verb to lay upon, to attack (note repetition of \epi\). They attacked and seized Paul before the charge was made.

rwp@Acts:27:1 @{That we should sail} (\tou apoplein hmas\). This genitive articular infinitive with \ekrith\ like the LXX construction translating the Hebrew infinitive construct is awkward in Greek. Several similar examples in strkjv@Luke:17:1; strkjv@Acts:10:25; strkjv@20:3| (Robertson, _Grammar_, p. 1068). Luke alone uses this old verb in N.T. He uses nine compounds of \ple\, to sail. Note the reappearance of "we" in the narrative. It is possible, of course, that Luke was not with Paul during the series of trials at Caesarea, or at least, not all the time. But it is natural for Luke to use "we" again because he and Aristarchus are travelling with Paul. In Caesarea Paul was the centre of the action all the time whether Luke was present or not. The great detail and minute accuracy of Luke's account of this voyage and shipwreck throw more light upon ancient seafaring than everything else put together. Smith's _Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul_ is still a classic on the subject. Though so accurate in his use of sea terms, yet Luke writes like a landsman, not like a sailor. Besides, the character of Paul is here revealed in a remarkable fashion. {They delivered} (\paredidoun\). Imperfect active \mega\ form rather than the old \-mi\ form \paredidosan\ as in strkjv@4:33|, from \paradidmi\. Perhaps the imperfect notes the continuance of the handing over. {Certain other prisoners} (\tinas heterous desmtas\). Bound (\desmtas\) like Paul, but not necessarily appellants to Caesar, perhaps some of them condemned criminals to amuse the Roman populace in the gladiatorial shows, most likely pagans though \heterous\ does not have to mean different kind of prisoners from Paul. {Of the Augustan band} (\speirs Sebasts\). Note Ionic genitive \speirs\, not \speiras\. See on ¯Matthew:27:1; strkjv@Acts:10:1|. \Cohortis Augustae\. We do not really know why this cohort is called "Augustan." It may be that it is part of the imperial commissariat (_frumentarii_) since Julius assumes chief authority in the grain ship (verse 11|). These legionary centurions when in Rome were called _peregrini_ (foreigners) because their work was chiefly in the provinces. This man Julius may have been one of them.

rwp@Acts:27:16 @{Running under the lee of} (\hupodramontes\). Second aorist active participle of \hupotrech\. Same use of \hupo\ as in \hupepleusamen\ (verses 4,8|) for "under the lee", under the protection of. \Nsion\ is diminutive of \nsos\, a small island. The MSS. vary between Cauda (B) and Clauda (Aleph). {To secure the boat} (\perikrateis genesthai ts skaphs\). "To become masters (\perikrateis\ from \peri\ and \kratos\, power over, found in Susannah and ecclesiastical writers, and here only in N.T.) of the boat ("dug out," like Indian boats, literally, from \skapt\, to dig, old word, here only in N.T. and verses 30,32|). The smooth water behind the little island enabled them to do this. {When they had hoisted it up} (\hn rantes\). "Which (the little boat) having hoisted up (\arantes\, verse 13|)." Even so it was "with difficulty" (\molis\). Perhaps the little boat was waterlogged. {Used helps} (\botheiais echrnto\). Imperfect middle of \chraomai\ with instrumental case. The "helps" were ropes or chains, no doubt. {Under-girding the ship} (\hupoznnuntes to ploion\). Present active participle of \hupoznnumi\. Old verb, here only in N.T. Probably cables (\hupozmata\) or ropes were used under the hull of the ship laterally or even longitudinally, tightly secured on deck. This "frapping" was more necessary for ancient vessels because of the heavy mast. The little island made it possible to do this also. {Lest we be cast upon the Syrtis} (\m eis tn Surtin ekpessin\). Final clause after verb of fearing (\phoboumenoi\) with \m\ and the second aorist active subjunctive of \ekpipt\, old verb to fall out or off, to be cast away. Songs:here and verses 26,29|, a classical use of the verb for a ship driven out of its course on to shoals or rocks (Page who cites Xenophon, _Anab_. VII. 5, 12). The Syrtis was the name for two quicksands between Carthage and Cyrenaica, this clearly being the Syrtis Major most dangerous because of the sandbanks (\surtis\, from \sur\). The wind would drive the ship right into this peril if something were not done. {They lowered the gear} (\chalasantes to skeuos\). First aorist active participle of \chala\ (cf. strkjv@Luke:5:4| for lowering the nets). \Skeuos\ means vessel or gear. They slackened or reduced sail, especially the mainsail, but leaving enough to keep the ship's head as close to the wind as was practicable. {Songs:were driven} (\houts epheronto\). Imperfect passive indicative again as in verse 15| with the addition of \houts\ (thus). The ship was now fixed as near to the wind (E N E) as possible (seven points). That would enable the ship to go actually W by N and so avoid the quicksands. J. Smith has shown that, a day being lost around Cauda, the ship going 36 miles in 24 hours in 13 days would make 468 miles. The Island of Malta (Melita) is precisely in that direction (W by N) from Cauda and is 480 miles. Page sees a difficulty about this explanation of the steady drift of the ship in the word \diapheromenon\ in verse 27|, but that was at the end of the drifting and the varied winds could have come then and not before. The whole narrative as explained carefully in Smith's _Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul_ is a masterpiece of precise and accurate scholarship. A resume of his results appears in my _Luke the Historian in the Light of Research_.

rwp@Info_James @ RECENT BOOKS ON JAMES Baljon, J. M. S., _Comm. op de katholieke brieven_ (1904). Bardenhewer, O., _Der Brief des hl. Jakobus_ (1928). Bartmann, _St. Paulus und St. Jakobus_. Belser, J. E., _Epistel des hl. Jakobus_ (1909). Beyschlag, W., _Der Brief des Jakobus_. Meyer Komm. 6 Aufl. (1898). Brown, Charles, _The General Epistle of James_. 2nd ed. (1907). Camerlinck, _Commentarius in epistolas catholicas_ (1909). Carpenter, W. Boyd, _The Wisdom of James the Just_ (1903). Carr, Arthur, _The General Epistle of James_. Cambridge Greek Testament. New ed. (1905). Chaine, J., _L Epitre de S. Jacques_ (1927). Dale, R. W., _Discourses on the Epistle of James (1895). Deems, C. F., _The Gospel of Common Sense_. Dibelius, _M., Meyer's Comm. 7 Aufl. (1921). Feine, _Der Jakobusbrief_, etc. (1893). Fitch, _James the Lord's Brother_. Gaugusch, L., _Der Lehrgehalt der Jakobus-epistel_ (1914). Grafe, _Stellung und Bedeutung des Jakobusbriefes_ (1904). Grosheide, F. W., _Deuteronomy:brief aan de Hebreen en de brief des Jakobus_ (1927). Hauck, F., _Der Br. d. Jak. in Zahn's Komm_. (1926). Hollmann, G., _Die Schriften d. N.T_. 3 Aufl. (1917). Holtzmann, O., _Das N.T. II_ (1926). Hort, F. J. A., _The Epistle of James as far as strkjv@4:7_ (1909). Huther, J. E., _Meyer's Komm_. 3 Aufl. (1870). Johnstone, R., _Lectures Exegetical and Practical_. 2nd ed. (1889). Knowling, R. J., _Comm. on the Epistle of St. James_ (1904). Westminster Series. Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of St. James_. 3rd ed. (1910). Meinertz, _Der Jakobusbrief und sein Verfasser_ (1905). Meyer, A., _Das Ratsel des Jak_. (1930). Moffatt, James, _The General Epistles (James, Peter, and Judas_) (1928). Osterley, W. E., _The Epistle of St. James_. Expos. Gk. Test. (1910). Parry, J., _The General Epistle of James_ (1904). Patrick, W., _James, the Lord's Brother_ (1906). Plummer, A., _The General Epistle of St. James_. Expos. Bible (1891). Rendall, G. H., _The Epistle of St. James and Judaic Chris- tianity_ (1927). Robertson, A. T., _Studies in the Epistle of James_. 3rd ed. (1923). First in 1915 as _Pract. and Social Aspects of Christianity_. Ropes, J. H., _A Crit. and Exeget. Comm. on the Epistle of St. James_. Int. and Crit. Comm. (1916). Smith, H. M., _The Epistle of James_ (1925). Soden, H. Von, _Der Brief des Jakobus_. Hand-Comm. (1893). Spitta, F., _Der Brief des Jakobus untersucht_ (1896). Taylor, J. F., _The Apostle of Patience_ (1907). Weiss, B., _Die Katholische Briefe_ (1902). _Der Jakobusbrief und die neuere Kritik_ (1904). Windisch, H., _Die Katholische Briefe. Handbuch Zum N.T._, 2 Aufl. (1930). strkjv@James:1:1 @{James} (\Iakbos\). Grecised form (nominative absolute) of the Hebrew \Iakb\ (so LXX). Common name among the Jews, and this man in Josephus (_Ant_. XX.9.1) and three others of this name in Josephus also. {Servant} (\doulos\). Bond-servant or slave as Paul (Romans:1:1; strkjv@Phillipians:1:1; strkjv@Titus:1:1|). {Of the Lord Jesus Christ} (\kuriou Isou Christou\). Here on a par with God (\theou\) and calls himself not \adelphos\ (brother) of Jesus, but \doulos\. The three terms here as in strkjv@2:1| have their full significance: Jesus is the Messiah and Lord. James is not an Ebionite. He accepts the deity of Jesus his brother, difficult as it was for him to do so. The word \kurios\ is frequent in the LXX for _Elohim_ and _Jahweh_ as the Romans applied it to the emperor in their emperor worship. See strkjv@1Corinthians:12:3| for \Kurios Isous\ and strkjv@Phillipians:2:11| for \Kurios Isous Christos\. {To the twelve tribes} (\tais ddeka phulais\). Dative case. The expression means "Israel in its fulness and completeness" (Hort), regarded as a unity (Acts:26:7|) with no conception of any "lost" tribes. {Which are of the Dispersion} (\tais en ti diaspori\). "Those in the Dispersion" (repeated article). The term appears in strkjv@Deuteronomy:28:25| (LXX) and comes from \diaspeir\, to scatter (sow) abroad. In its literal sense we have it in strkjv@John:7:34|, but here and in strkjv@1Peter:1:1| Christian Jews are chiefly, if not wholly, in view. The Jews at this period were roughly divided into Palestinian Jews (chiefly agriculturists) and Jews of the Dispersion (dwellers in cities and mainly traders). In Palestine Aramaic was spoken as a rule, while in the Western Diaspora the language was Greek (_Koin_, LXX), though the Eastern Diaspora spoke Aramaic and Syriac. The Jews of the Diaspora were compelled to compare their religion with the various cults around them (comparative religion) and had a wider outlook on life. James writes thus in cultural _Koin_ but in the Hebraic tone. {Greeting} (\chairein\). Absolute infinitive (present active of \chair\) as in strkjv@Acts:15:23| (the Epistle to Antioch and the churches of Syria and Galatia). It is the usual idiom in the thousands of papyri letters known to us, but in no other New Testament letter. But note \chairein legete\ in strkjv@2John:1:10,11|.

rwp@Info_John @ A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE (SINCE 1880) ABBOT, EZRA, _On the Authorship of the Fourth Gospel_ (1880). ABBOT, PEABODY, and LIGHTFOOT, _The Fourth Gospel_ (1891). ABBOTT, E.A., _Johannine Vocabulary_ (1935).,_Johannine Grammar_ (1906). APPEL, _Die Echtheit des Johannesevangeliums_ (1915). ASKWITH, E.H., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1910). BACON, B.W., _The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate_ (1910). BALDENSPERGER, W., _Der Prolog des vierten Evangeliums_ (1898). BARTH, K., _The Gospel of John and the Synoptic Gospels_ (1907). BAUER, W., _Das Johannes-Evangelium_. 2 Aufl. (1925). BELZER, _Das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes_ (1905). BERNARD, J. H., _Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1929), in Int. Crit. Comm. BERT, _Das Evangelium des Johannes_ (1922). BLASS, F., _Evangelium secundum Johannem_ (1902). BROOKE, A. E., _The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (Cambridge Biblical Essays, pp. 289 to 328. 1909). BURCH, VACHER, _The Structure and Message of St. John's Gospel_ (1928). BURNEY, C. F., _The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922). CALMES, _L'Evangile selon S. Jean_ (1904). CANDLER, W. A., _Practical Studies in the Gospel of John_ (3 vols,, 1912-15). CARPENTER, J. ESTLIN, _The Johannine Writings_ (1927). CHAPMAN, DOM JOHN, _John the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel_ (1911). CHARNWOOD, LORD, _According to St. John_ (1925). CLEMEN, C., _Die Entstehung des Johannesevangeliums_ (1912). D'ALMA, _Lamentations:Controverse du quatrieme evangile_ (1908).,Philo et le quotrieme evangile_ (1911). DAUSCH' _Das Johannesevangelium_ (1909). DELFF, H., _Das vierte Evangelium wiederhergestellt_ (1890).,Neue Beitrage zur Kritik und Erklarung des vierten Evangeliums (1890). DODS, M., _Expositor's Bible_ (2 vols., 1891).,Expositor's Greek Testament_ (1897). DRUMMOND, JAMES, _An Inquiry into the Character and Author- ship of the Fourth Gospel_ (1904). EVANS, H. H., _St. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel_ (1888). EWALD, P., _Das Hauptproblem der Evangelienfrage und der Weg zu seiner Losung_ (1890). FOUARD, S., _Jean et la hn de l'age apostolique_ (1904). GARDNER, P., _The Ephesian Gospel_ (1915). GARVIE, A. E., _The Beloved Disciple_ (1922). GOBEL, _Die Reden des Herrn nach Johannes_ (2 vols., 1906, 1910). GODET, F., _Comm. on the Gospel of St. John_ (Tr., 2 vols., 1886--90). GOGUEL, M., _Les sources du recit Johannique de la Passion_ (1910).,Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1924). GORDON, S. D., _Quiet Talks on St. John's Gospel_. GORE, C., _Exposition of the Gospel of John_ (1920). GREEN, A. V., _The Ephesian Canonical Writings_ (1910). GREGORY, C. R., _Wellhausen und Johannes_ (1910). GRILL, J., _Untersuchungen uber die Entstehung des vierten Evangeliums_ (1902). GUMBEL, _Das Johannesevangelium Eine Erganzung des Lukas ev_. (1911). HARRIS, J. RENDEL, _The Origin of the Prologue to St. John's Gospel_ (1917). HAYES, D. A., _John and His Writings_ (1917). HOERNLE, E. S., _The Record of the Loved Disciple_ etc. (1913). HOLLAND, H. S., _The Philosophy of Faith and the Fourth Gospel_ (1919).,_The Fourth Gospel_ (1923). HOLTZMANN, H. J., _Evangelium, Briefe, und Offenbarung des Johannes_. 3 Aufl. (1908). HOLTZMANN, _Hand-Comm_. 3 Aufl. von Bauer (1908). HOVEY, A. H., _In American Comm_. (1885). HOWARD, W. F., _The Fourth Gospel in Recent Criticism and Interpretation_ (1931). IVERACH, JAMES, _Gospel of John_ (Int. Stand. Bible Encycl.). JACKSON, H. L., _The Fourth Gospel and Some Recent German Criticism_ (1906).,_The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_ (1918). JOHNSTON, J. S., _The Philosophy of the Fourth Gospel_ (1909). KEISKER, _The Inner Witness of the Fourth Gospel_ (1922). KREYENBUHL, _Neue Losung der Johanneischen Frage_ (1905). LARFIELD, _Die beide Johannes von Ephesus_ (1914). LEATHES, STANLEY, _The Witness of St. John to Christ_. LEPIN, _L'origine du quatrieme evangile_ (1907; 1927).,_Lamentations:valeur historique du quatrieme euangile_ (1910). LEWIS, F. G., _The Irenaeus Testimony to the Fourth Gospel_ (1908). LEWIS, F. G., _Disarrangements in the Fourth Gospel_ (1910). LIGHTFOOT, J. B., _Biblical Essays_ (pages 1-198; I-III, 1893). LLOYD, J. P. D., _The Son of Thunder_ (1932). LOISY, A., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1903). LOWRIE, _The Doctrine of John_ (1899). LYMAN, MARY ELY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Life of Today_ (1931). MANSON, W., _The Incarnate Glory_ (1923). MAURICE, F. D., _The Gospel of St. John_ (1906). McGREGoR, G. H., _The Moffatt Commentary_ (1930). MONTGOMERY, J. A., _The Origin of the Gospel According to St. John_ (1923). MOUSE, _Johannes und Paulus_ (1915). MUIRHEAD, L. A., _The Message of the Fourth Gospel_ (1925). NOLLOTH, C. F., _The Fourth Evangelist_ (1925). NUNN, H. P. V., _The Son of Zebedee and the Fourth Gospel (1927). ORR, JAMES, _The Authenticity of St. John's Gospel Deduced from Internal Evidence_. OVERBECK, _Das Johannesevangelium_ (1911). PLUMMER, A., _Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1913). REVILLE, J., _Leviticus:quatrieme evangile_ (1901). REYNOLDS, H. R., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D. B., 1899). RICHMOND, W., _The Gospel of the Rejection_ (1906). ROBERTSON, A. T., _The Divinity of Christ in the Gospel of John_ (1916). ROBINSON, A., _The Historical Character of St. John's Gospel_ (1929). ROBINSON, B. W., _The Gospel of John_ (1925). SANDAY, W., _Criticism of the Fourth Gospel_ (1905). SCHLATTER, _Die Sprache und Heimath des vierten Evangelisten_ (1903). SCHMIEDEL, P. W., _The Johannine Writings_ (1908). SCOTT, E. F., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Purpose and Theology_ (1906). SCOTT, E. F., _The Historical and Religious Value of the Fourth Gospel_ (1903). SCOTT-MONCRIEFF, C. E., _St. John, Apostle, Evangelist and Prophet_ (1909). SELBIE, W. B., _Belief and Life: Studies in the Thought of the Fourth Gospel_ (1916). SMITH, J. R., _The Teaching of the Fourth Gospel_ (1903). SMITH, P. V., _The Fourth Gospel: Its Historical Importance_ (1926). SPEER, R. E., _The Greatest Book in the World_ (1915). SPITTA, F., _Das Johannesevangelium als Quelle der Geschichte Jesu_ (1910). STANGE, _Die Eigenart des Johanneischen Produktion_ (1914). STANTON, V. H., _The Fourth Gospel_ (Part III of Gospels as Hist. Documents, 1921). STEVENS, G. B., _The Johannine Theology_ (1898). STRACHAN, R. H., _Gospel of John_ (Hastings, D C G 1906).,The Fourth Gospel: Its Significance and Environ- ment_ (1917).,The Fourth Evangelist: Dramatist or Historian_ (1925). TILLMANN, FRITZ, _Das Johannesevangelium Uebersetzt und Erklart_ (1931). VEDDER, H. C., _The Johannine Writings and the Johannine Problems_ (1917). WARSCHAUER, J., _The Problem of the Fourth Gospel_. WATKINS, W. H., _Modern Criticism Considered in its Rela- tion to the Fourth Gospel_ (1890). WATSON, H. A., _The Mysticism of St. John's Gospel_ (1916). WEARING, _The World View of the Fourth Gospel_ (1918). WEISS, B., _Meyer Komm_. 9 Aufl. (1902).,_Das Johannesevangelium als einheitliches Werk_ (1911). WELLHAUSEN, J., _Das Evangelium Johannis_ (1908). WENDT, H. H., _The Gospel according to St. John: An Inquiry into its Genesis and Historical Value_ (1911).,_Die Schichten im vierten Evangelium_ (1911). WESTCOTT, B. F., _The Gospel according to St. John_ (2 vols., 1908). WHITELAW, _The Gospel of John_ (1888). WINDISCH, H., _Johannes und die Synoptiker_ (1927). WORSLEY, _The Fourth Gospel and the Synoptists_ (1911). WREDE, W., _Charakter und Tendenz del Johannesevangelium_ (1903). ZAHN, TH., _Dal Evangelium Johannis (1908). 6 Aufl. (1921). strkjv@John:1:1 @{In the beginning} (\en archi\). \Arch\ is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebrew _be reshith_ in strkjv@Genesis:1:1|. But Westcott notes that here John carries our thoughts beyond the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There is no argument here to prove the existence of God any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exists and is the Creator of the universe as scientists like Eddington and Jeans assume or matter is eternal or it has come out of nothing. {Was} (\n\). Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of \eimi\ to be which conveys no idea of origin for God or for the Logos, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (\egeneto\, became) appears in verse 14| for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos. See the distinction sharply drawn in strkjv@8:58| "before Abraham came (\genesthai\) I am" (\eimi\, timeless existence). {The Word} (\ho logos\). \Logos\ is from \leg\, old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speak, to express an opinion. \Logos\ is common for reason as well as speech. Heraclitus used it for the principle which controls the universe. The Stoics employed it for the soul of the world (\anima mundi\) and Marcus Aurelius used \spermatikos logos\ for the generative principle in nature. The Hebrew _memra_ was used in the Targums for the manifestation of God like the Angel of Jehovah and the Wisdom of God in strkjv@Proverbs:8:23|. Dr. J. Rendel Harris thinks that there was a lost wisdom book that combined phrases in Proverbs and in the Wisdom of Solomon which John used for his Prologue (_The Origin of the _Prologue to St. John_, p. 43) which he has undertaken to reproduce. At any rate John's standpoint is that of the Old Testament and not that of the Stoics nor even of Philo who uses the term \Logos\, but not John's conception of personal pre-existence. The term \Logos\ is applied to Christ only in strkjv@John:1:1,14; strkjv@Revelation:19:13; strkjv@1John:1:1| "concerning the Word of life" (an incidental argument for identity of authorship). There is a possible personification of "the Word of God" in strkjv@Hebrews:4:12|. But the personal pre-existence of Christ is taught by Paul (2Corinthians:8:9; strkjv@Phillipians:2:6f.; strkjv@Colossians:1:17|) and in strkjv@Hebrews:1:2f.| and in strkjv@John:17:5|. This term suits John's purpose better than \sophia\ (wisdom) and is his answer to the Gnostics who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the \aeon\ Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). The pre-existent Logos "became flesh" (\sarx egeneto\, verse 14|) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once. {With God} (\pros ton theon\). Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God. \Pros\ with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other. In strkjv@1John:2:1| we have a like use of \pros\: "We have a Paraclete with the Father" (\paraklton echomen pros ton patera\). See \prospon pros prospon\ (face to face, strkjv@1Corinthians:13:12|), a triple use of \pros\. There is a papyrus example of \pros\ in this sense \to gnston ts pros alllous suntheias\, "the knowledge of our intimacy with one another" (M.&M., _Vocabulary_) which answers the claim of Rendel Harris, _Origin of Prologue_, p. 8) that the use of \pros\ here and in strkjv@Mark:6:3| is a mere Aramaism. It is not a classic idiom, but this is _Koin_, not old Attic. In strkjv@John:17:5| John has \para soi\ the more common idiom. {And the Word was God} (\kai theos n ho logos\). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying \ho theos n ho logos\. That would mean that all of God was expressed in \ho logos\ and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (\ho logos\) and the predicate without it (\theos\) just as in strkjv@John:4:24| \pneuma ho theos\ can only mean "God is spirit," not "spirit is God." Songs:in strkjv@1John:4:16| \ho theos agap estin\ can only mean "God is love," not "love is God" as a so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. For the article with the predicate see Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 767f. Songs:in strkjv@John:1:14| \ho Logos sarx egeneto\, "the Word became flesh," not "the flesh became Word." Luther argues that here John disposes of Arianism also because the Logos was eternally God, fellowship of Father and Son, what Origen called the Eternal Generation of the Son (each necessary to the other). Thus in the Trinity we see personal fellowship on an equality.

rwp@John:13:1 @{Now before the feast of the passover} (\pro de ts heorts tou pascha\). Just before, John means, not twenty-four hours before, that is our Thursday evening (beginning of 15th of Nisan, sunset to sunset Jewish day), since Jesus was crucified on Friday 15th of Nisan. Hence Jesus ate the regular passover meal at the usual time. The whole feast, including the feast of unleavened bread, lasted eight days. For a discussion of the objections to this interpretation of John in connexion with the Synoptic Gospels one may consult my _Harmony of the Gospels_, pp. 279-84, and David Smith's _In the Days of His Flesh_, Appendix VIII. The passover feast began on the 15th Nisan at sunset, the passover lamb being slain the afternoon of 14th Nisan. There seems no real doubt that this meal in strkjv@John:13:1-30| is the real passover meal described by the Synoptics also (Mark:14:18-21; strkjv@Matthew:26:21-25; strkjv@Luke:22:21-23|), followed by the institution of the Lord's Supper. Thus understood verse 1| here serves as an introduction to the great esoteric teaching of Christ to the apostles (John:13:2-17:26|), called by Barnas Sears _The Heart of Christ_. This phrase goes with the principal verb \gapsen\ (loved). {Knowing} (\eids\). Second perfect active participle, emphasizing the full consciousness of Christ. He was not stumbling into the dark as he faced "his hour" (\autou h hra\). See strkjv@18:4; strkjv@19:28| for other examples of the insight and foresight (Bernard) of Jesus concerning his death. See on strkjv@12:23| for use before by Jesus. {That he should depart} (\hina metabi\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second aorist active subjunctive of \metabain\, old word, to go from one place to another, here (5:24; strkjv@1John:3:14|) to go from this world (8:23|) back to the Father from whom he had come (14:12,28; strkjv@16:10,28; strkjv@17:5|). {His own which were in the world} (\tous idious tous en ti kosmi\). His own disciples (17:6,9,11|), those left in the world when he goes to the Father, not the Jews as in strkjv@1:11|. See strkjv@Acts:4:23; strkjv@1Timothy:5:8| for the idiom. John pictures here the outgoing of Christ's very heart's love (chs. strkjv@John:13-17|) towards these men whom he had chosen and whom he loved "unto the end" (\eis telos\) as in strkjv@Matthew:10:22; strkjv@Luke:18:15|, but here as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:2:16| rather "to the uttermost." The culmination of the crisis ("his hour") naturally drew out the fulness of Christ's love for them as is shown in these great chapters (John:13-17|).

rwp@Info_Revelation @ A BRIEF BIBLIOGRAPHY (ONLY BOOKS SINCE 1875) Abbott, E. A., _Johannine Grammar_ (1906).,_Notes on New Testament Criticism_ (Part VII of Diatessarica, 1907). Allo, E. B., _L'apocalypse et l'epoque de la parousia_ (1915).,_Saint Jean. L'apocalypse_ (1921). Baldensperger, _Messian. Apok. Hoffnung_. 3rd ed. (1903). Baljon, J. M. S., _Openbaring van Johannes_ (1908). Beckwith, J. T., _The Apocalypse of John_ (1919). Benson, E. W., _The Apocalypse_ (1900). Berg, _The Drama of the Apocalypse_ (1894). Bleek, F., _Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1875). Boll, _Aus der Offenbarung Johannis_ (1914). Bousset, W., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_. 2 Aufl. (1906).,_Zur Textkritik der Apokalypse_ (1894). Brown, Charles, _Heavenly Visions_ (1911). Brown, D., _The Structure of the Apocalypse_ (1891). Bullinger, _Die Apokalypse_ (1904). Bungeroth, _Schlussel zur Offenbarung Johannis_ (1907). Burger, C. H. A., _Offenbarung Johannis_ (1877). Cadwell, _The Revelation of Jesus Christ_ (1920). Calmes, _L'Apokalypse devant la Critique_ (1907). Campbell, _The Patmos Letters Applied to Modern Criticism_ (1908). Carrington, P., _The Meaning of the Revelation_ (1931). Case, S. J., _The Millennial Hope_ (1918).,_The Revelation of John_ (1920). Charles, R. H., _Studies in the Apocalypse_ (1913).,_The Revelation of St. John_. 2 vols. (1921). Chevalin, _L'apocalypse et les temps presents_ (1904). Crampon, _L'apocalypse de S. Jean_ (1904). Dean, J. T., _The Book of Revelation_ (1915) Deissmann, A., _Light from the Ancient East_. Tr. by Strachan (1927). Delaport, _Fragments sahidiques du N.T. Apocalypse_ (1906). Douglas, C. E., _New Light on the Revelation of St. John the Divine_ (1923). Dusterdieck, _Offenbarung Johannis_. 4 Aufl. (1887). Eckman, _When Christ Comes Again_ (1917). Erbes, _Offenbar. Johan. Kritischuntersucht_ (1891). Forbes, H. P., _International Handbook on the Apocalypse_ (1907). Gebhardt, _Doctrine of the Apocalypse_ (1878). Geil, W. E., _The Isle That Is Called Patmos_ (1905). Gibson, E. C. S., _The Revelation of St. John_ (1910). Gigot, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1915). Glazebrook, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1924). Gunkel, H., _Schopfung und Chaos_ (1895). Gwynn, _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1897). Harnack, A., _Die Chronologie der altchristlichen Litteratur_. Bd I (1897). Henderson, B. W., _The Life and Principate of the Emperor Nero_ (1903). Hill, _Apocalyptic Problems_ (1916). Hill, Erskine, _Mystic Studies in the Apocalypse_ (1931). Hirscht, _Die Apokalypse und ihre neueste Kritik_ (1895). Holtzmann, H. J., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_ (1891). Holtzmann-Bauer, _Hand-Comm., Offenbarung des Johannis_. 3 Aufl. (1908). Horne, _The Meaning of the Apocalypse_ (1916). Hort, F. J. A., _The Apocalypse of St. John, Chs. 1-3_ (1908). James, M. R., _The Apocalypse in Art_ (1931). Jowett, G. T., _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1910). Kubel, _Offenbarung Johannis_ (1893). Laughlin, _The Solecisms of the Apocalypse_ (1902). Lee, S., _Revelation in Speaker's Comm_. (1881). Linder, _Die Offenbarung des Johannis aufgeschlossen_ (1905). Llwyd, J. P. D., _The Son of Thunder_ (1932). Lohmeyer, E., _Die Offenbarung des Johannes_. Handbuch zum N.T. (1926). Loisy, A., _L'Apocalypse de Jean_ (1923). Matheson, _Sidelights upon Patmos_. Milligan, W., _The Revelation of St. John_. Schaff's Popular Comm. (1885).,_The Book of Revelation_. Expositor's Bible (1889).,_Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1892).,_Discussions on the Apocalypse_ (1893). Moffatt, James, _Intr. to Literature of the N.T_. (1911).,_Revelation in Expos. Greek Testament_ (1910). Moule, H.C., _Some Thoughts on the Seven Epistles_ (1915). Mozley, _The Christian's Hope in the Apocalypse_ (1915). Oman, John, _The Book of Revelation_ (1923).,_The Text of Revelation_ (1928). Osborn, _The Lion and the Lamb_ (1922). Palmer, _The Drama of the Apocalypse_ (1902). Paul, _Latter Day Light on the Apocalypse_ (1898). Peake, A. S., _The Revelation of John_ (1921). Porter, F. C., _The Messages of the Apocalyptic Writers_ (1905). Pounder, _Historical Notes on the Book of Revelation_ (1912). Prager, L., _Die Offenbarung Johannis_ (1901). Ramsay, A., _Revelation in Westminster N.T_. (1910). Ramsay, W. M., _The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia_ (1904). Rauch, _Offenbarung des Johannis_ (1894). Reymond, _L'apocalypse_ (1908). Ross, J. J., _Pearls from Patmos_ (1923). Russell, J. S., _The Parousia_ (1878). Sabatier, _Les Origines Litteraires et la Comp. de l'Apoc_. (1888). Schlatter, _Der Evangelist Johannes_ (1931). Schoen, _L'Origine de l'Apocalypse_ (1887). Scott, C. Anderson, _Revelation in New Century Bible_ (1902). Scott, C. A., _Revelation in Devot. Comm_. (1906). Scott, J. J., _Lectures on the Apocalypse_ (1909). Selwyn, E. C., _The Christian Prophets and the Prophetic Apocalypse_ (1901). Shepherd, W. J. L., _The Revelation of St. John the Divine_. 2 vols. (1923). Simcox, W. H., _Revelation in Cambridge Greek Testament_ (1893). Smith, J. A., _Revelation in American Comm_. (1888).,_The World Lighted_ (1890).,_The Divine Parable of History_ (1901). Spitta, F., _Die Offenbarung des Johannis_ (1889). Strange, _Instructions on the Revelation of St. John the Divine_ (1900). Swete, H. B., _The Apocalypse of St. John_ (1906). 2nd ed. 1907. Turner, C. H., _Studies in Early Church History_ (1912). Vischer, _Die Offenb. Johan. eine judische Apok_ (1886). Volter, _Offenb. Johannis_. 2 Aufl. (1911).,_Das Problem der Apok_. (1893). Weiss, B., _Die Johannes-Apokalypse_. Textkrit. (1891, 2 Aufl. 1902). Weiss, J., _Offenb. Johannis_ (1904). Wellhausen, J., _Analyse der Offenb_. (1907). Weyland, _Omwerkings-en Compilatie-Hupothesen Toegepast op de Apok_. (1888). Whiting, _The Revelation of John_ (1918). Zahn, _Introduction to the N.T_. 3 vols. (1909).,_Komm_. (1926).