Bible:
Filter: String:

OT.filter - rwp theos:

rwp@1Corinthians:6:16 @{One body} (\hen sma\). With the harlot. That union is for the harlot the same as with the wife. The words quoted from strkjv@Genesis:2:24| describing the sexual union of husband and wife, are also quoted and explained by Jesus in strkjv@Matthew:19:5f.| which see for discussion of the translation Hebraism with use of \eis\. {Saith he} (\phsin\). Supply either \ho theos\ (God) or \h graph\ (the Scripture).

rwp@2Corinthians:1:3 @{Blessed} (\eulogtos\). From old verb \euloge\, to speak well of, but late verbal in LXX and Philo. Used of men in strkjv@Genesis:24:31|, but only of God in N.T. as in strkjv@Luke:1:68| and chiefly in Paul (2Corinthians:11:31; strkjv@Romans:1:25|). Paul has no thanksgiving or prayer as in strkjv@1Corinthians:1:4-9|, but he finds his basis for gratitude in God, not in them. {The God and Father} (\ho theos kai patr\). Songs:rightly, only one article with both substantives as in strkjv@2Peter:1:1|. Paul gives the deity of Jesus Christ as our Lord (\Kuriou\), but he does not hesitate to use the language here as it occurs. See strkjv@1Peter:1:3; strkjv@Ephesians:1:3| where the language is identical with that here. {The father of mercies} (\ho patr tn oiktirmn\) and God of all comfort (\kai theos pass paraklses\). Paul adds an item to each word. He is the compassionate Father characterized by mercies (\oiktirmn\, old word from \oikteir\, to pity, and here in plural, emotions and acts of pity). He is the God of all comfort (\paraklses\, old word from \parakale\, to call to one's side, common with Paul). Paul has already used it of God who gave eternal comfort (2Thessalonians:2:16|). The English word comfort is from the Latin _confortis_ (brave together). The word used by Jesus of the Holy Spirit as the Comforter or Paraklete is this very word (John:14:16; strkjv@16:7|). Paul makes rich use of the verb \parakale\ and the substantive \paraklsis\ in this passage (3-7|). He urges all sorrowing and troubled hearts to find strength in God.

rwp@2Corinthians:4:6 @{God who said} (\ho theos ho eipn\). Paraphrase of strkjv@Genesis:1:3|. {Who shined} (\hos elampsen\). Like a lamp in the heart (cf. strkjv@Matthew:5:15|). Miners carry a lamp on the forehead, Christians carry one in their hearts lit by the Spirit of God. {To give the light} (\pros phtismon\). For the illumination. {In the face of Jesus Christ} (\en prospi Isou Christou\). The Christian who looks on the face of Jesus Christ as Moses looked upon the glory of God will be able to give the illumination of the knowledge of the glory of God. See strkjv@2:10| for \prospon\.

rwp@2Corinthians:9:7 @{He hath purposed} (\proirtai\). Perfect middle indicative of \proaireomai\, to choose beforehand, old verb, here only in N.T. Permanent purpose also. {Not grudgingly} (\m ek lups\). The use of \m\ rather than \ou\ shows that the imperative \poieit\ (do) or \didot\ (give) is to be supplied. Not give as out of sorrow. {Or of necessity} (\ ex anagks\). As if it were like pulling eye-teeth. {For God loveth a cheerful giver} (\hilaron gar dotn agapi ho theos\). Our word "hilarious" comes from \hilaron\ which is from \hilaos\ (propitious), an old and common adjective, only here in N.T.

rwp@Acts:3:25 @{Ye} (\Humeis\). Emphatic position. {The covenant which God made} (\ts diathks hs ho theos dietheto\). Literally, "the covenant which God covenanted." \Diathk\ and \dietheto\ (second aorist middle indicative of \diathmi\) are the same root. See on strkjv@Matthew:26:28|. The covenant (agreement between two, \dia, tithmi\) was with Abraham (Genesis:12:1-3|) and repeated at various times (Genesis:18:18; strkjv@22:18; strkjv@26:4|, etc.). In strkjv@Hebrews:9:15-18| the word is used both for covenant and will. The genitive relative \hs\ attracted to case of the antecedent.

rwp@Acts:7:2 @{Brethren and fathers} (\andres adelphoi kai pateres\). The spectators (brethren) and members of the Sanhedrin (fathers) as Paul in strkjv@Acts:22:1|. {Hearken} (\akousate\). First aorist (ingressive) active imperative, Give me your attention now. {The God of glory} (\Hosea:theos ts doxs\). The God characterized by glory (genitive case, genus or kind) as seen in the Shekinah, the visible radiance of God. Jesus is also called "the Glory"=the Shekinah in strkjv@James:2:1|. Cf. strkjv@Exodus:25:22; strkjv@40:34; strkjv@Leviticus:9:6; strkjv@Hebrews:9:5|. By these words Stephen refutes the charge of blasphemy against God in strkjv@Acts:6:11|. {Appeared} (\phth\). First aorist passive indicative of \hora\. See on ¯Luke:23:43|. Before there was temple or tabernacle and away over in Mesopotamia (Ur of the Chaldees, strkjv@Genesis:11:31|), even before (\prin \ with the infinitive) he dwelt in Haran (\Charran\, or Carrae not far from Edessa, where Crassus met death after his defeat by the Parthians B.C. 53).

rwp@Ephesians:1:3 @{Blessed} (\eulogtos\). Verbal of \euloge\, common in the LXX for Hebrew _baruk_ (Vulgate _benedictus_) and applied usually to God, sometimes to men (Genesis:24:31|), but in N.T. always to God (Luke:1:68|), while \eulogmenos\ (perfect passive participle) is applied to men (Luke:1:42|). "While \eulogmenos\ points to an isolated act or acts, \eulogtos\ describes the intrinsic character" (Lightfoot). Instead of the usual \eucharistoumen\ (Colossians:1:3|) Paul here uses \eulogtos\, elsewhere only in strkjv@2Corinthians:1:3| in opening, though in a doxology in strkjv@Romans:1:25; strkjv@9:5; strkjv@2Corinthians:11:31|. The copula here is probably \estin\ (is), though either \est\ (imperative) or \ei\ (optative as wish) will make sense. {The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ} (\ho theos kai patr tou Kuriou hmn Isou Christou\). \Kai\ is genuine here, though not in strkjv@Colossians:1:3|. The one article (\ho\) with \theos kai patr\ links them together as in strkjv@1Thessalonians:1:3; strkjv@3:11,13; strkjv@Galatians:1:4|. See also the one article in strkjv@2Peter:1:1,11|. In strkjv@Ephesians:1:17| we have \ho theos tou Kuriou hmn Isou Christou\, and the words of Jesus in strkjv@John:20:17|. {Who hath blessed us} (\ho eulogsas hums\). First aorist active participle of \euloge\, the same word, antecedent action to the doxology (\eulogtos\). {With} (\en\). So-called instrumental use of \en\ though {in} is clear. {Every spiritual blessing} (\pasi eulogii pneumatiki\). Third use of the root \eulog\ (verbal, verb, substantive). Paul lovingly plays with the idea. The believer is a citizen of heaven and the spiritual blessings count for most to him. {In the heavenly places in Christ} (\en tois epouraniois en Christi\). In four other places in Eph. (1:20; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:10; strkjv@6:12|). This precise phrase (with \en\) occurs nowhere else in the N.T. and has a clearly local meaning in strkjv@1:20; strkjv@2:6; strkjv@3:10|, doubtful in strkjv@6:12|, but probably so here. In strkjv@2:6| the believer is conceived as already seated with Christ. Heaven is the real abode of the citizen of Christ's kingdom (Phillipians:3:20|) who is a stranger on earth (Phillipians:1:27; strkjv@Ephesians:2:19|). The word \epouranios\ (heavenly) occurs in various passages in the N.T. in contrast with \ta epigeia\ (the earthly) as in strkjv@John:3:12; strkjv@1Corinthians:15:40,48,49; strkjv@Phillipians:2:10|, with \patris\ (country) in strkjv@Hebrews:11:16|, with \klsis\ (calling) in strkjv@Hebrews:3:1|, with \drea\ (gift) in strkjv@Hebrews:6:4|, with \basileia\ (kingdom) in strkjv@2Timothy:4:18|.

rwp@Hebrews:4:10 @{As God did from his} (\hsper apo tn idin ho theos\). It is not cessation of work, but rather of the weariness and pain in toil. The writer pictures salvation as God's rest which man is to share and God will have perfect satisfaction when man is in harmony with him (Dods).

rwp@Hebrews:11:19 @{Accounting} (\logisamenos\). First aorist middle participle of \logizomai\. Abraham had God's clear command that contravened God's previous promise. This was his solution of his difficult situation. {God is able} (\dunatai ho theos\). God had given him Isaac in his old age. God can raise him from the dead. It was Abraham's duty to obey God. {In a parable} (\en paraboli\). See already strkjv@9:9| for \parabol\. Because of (\hothen\, whence) Abraham's superb faith Isaac was spared and so he received him back (\ekomisato\) as almost from the dead. This is the test that Abraham stood of which James speaks (James:2:23|).

rwp@James:4:6 @{More grace} (\meizona charin\). "Greater grace." Greater than what? "Greater grace in view of the greater requirement" (Ropes), like strkjv@Romans:5:20f|. God does this. {Wherefore} (\dio\). To prove this point James quotes strkjv@Proverbs:3:34|. {God resisteth the proud} (\ho theos huperphanois antitassetai\). Present middle (direct) indicative of \antitass\, old military term, to range in battle against, with dative case (Romans:13:2|) as in strkjv@5:6|. \Huperphanois\ (\huper, phainomai\) is like our vernacular "stuck-up folks" (Romans:1:30|), "haughty persons." {But giveth grace to the humble} (\tapeinois de didsin charin\). Anarthrous adjective again, "to humble or lowly persons," for which word see strkjv@1:9f|. Cf. strkjv@2:5-7; strkjv@5:1-6|.

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@Revelation:11:17 @{O Lord God} (\Kurie ho theos\). Vocative form \kurie\ and nominative form \ho theos\ (vocative in use). See strkjv@1:8; strkjv@4:8| for this combination with \ho pantokratr\ (the Almighty). For \ho n kai ho n\ (which art and which wast) see strkjv@1:4,8; strkjv@4:8; strkjv@16:5|. {Thou hast taken} (\eilphes\). Perfect active indicative of \lamban\, emphasizing the permanence of God's rule, "Thou hast assumed thy power." {Didst reign} (\ebasileusas\). Ingressive first aorist active indicative of \basileu\, "Didst begin to reign." See this combination of tenses (perfect and aorist) without confusion in strkjv@3:3; strkjv@5:7; strkjv@8:5|.

rwp@Revelation:13:1 @{Out of the sea} (\ek ts thalasss\). See strkjv@11:7| for "the beast coming up out of the abyss." The imagery comes from strkjv@Daniel:7:3|. See also strkjv@Revelation:17:8|. This "wild beast from the sea," as in strkjv@Daniel:7:17,23|, is a vast empire used in the interest of brute force. This beast, like the dragon (12:3|), has ten horns and seven heads, but the horns are crowned, not the heads. The Roman Empire seems to be meant here (17:9,12|). On "diadems" (\diadmata\) see strkjv@12:3|, only ten here, not seven as there. {Names of blasphemy} (\onomata blasphmias\). See strkjv@17:3| for this same phrase. The meaning is made plain by the blasphemous titles assumed by the Roman emperors in the first and second centuries, as shown by the inscriptions in Ephesus, which have \theos\ constantly applied to them.

rwp@Revelation:16:7 @{O Lord God, the Almighty} (\Kurie ho theos ho pantokratr\). Just as in strkjv@15:3| in the Song of Moses and of the Lamb, vocative with the article \ho\. "Judgments" (\kriseis\) here instead of "ways" (\hodoi\) there, and with the order of the adjectives reversed (\althinai kai dikaiai\, true and righteous).

rwp@Revelation:18:20 @{Rejoice over her} (\Euphrainou ep' auti\). Present middle imperative of \euphrain\, for which verb see strkjv@11:10|, used there of the joy of the wicked over the death of the two witnesses, just the opposite picture to this. "The song of doom" (Charles) here seems to be voiced by John himself. {God hath judged your judgment} (\ekrinen ho theos to krima\). First aorist (prophetic) active of \krin\ and cognate accusative \krima\, here a case for trial (Exodus:18:22; strkjv@1Corinthians:6:7|), not a sentence as in strkjv@17:1|. God has approved the case of heaven.

rwp@Revelation:21:7 @{He that overcometh} (\ho nikn\). Recalls the promises at the close of each of the Seven Letters in chapters 2 and 3. {Shall inherit} (\klronomsei\). Future active of \klronome\, word with great history (Mark:10:17; strkjv@1Peter:1:4; strkjv@Galatians:4:7; strkjv@Romans:8:17|), here interpreted for the benefit of these who share in Christ's victory. {I will be his God} (\Esomai auti theos\). Repeated Old Testament promise (first to Abraham, strkjv@Genesis:17:7f.|). Cf. strkjv@Revelation:21:3|. {He shall be my son} (\autos estai moi huios\). Made first of Solomon (2Samuel:7:14|) and applied to David later in strkjv@Psalms:89:26f|.

rwp@Romans:8:33 @{Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect?} (\tis egkalesei kata eklektn theou?\). Future active indicative of \egkale\, old verb, to come forward as accuser (forensic term) in case in court, to impeach, as in strkjv@Acts:19:40; strkjv@23:29; strkjv@26:2|, the only N.T. examples. Satan is the great Accuser of the brethren. {It is God that justifieth} (\theos ho dikain\). God is the Judge who sets us right according to his plan for justification (3:21-31|). The Accuser must face the Judge with his charges.

rwp@Romans:9:5 @{Of whom} (\ex hn\). Fourth relative clause and here with \ex\ and the ablative. {Christ} (\ho Christos\). The Messiah. {As concerning the flesh} (\to kata sarka\). Accusative of general reference, "as to the according to the flesh." Paul limits the descent of Jesus from the Jews to his human side as he did in strkjv@1:3f|. {Who is over all, God blessed for ever} (\ho on epi pantn theos eulogtos\). A clear statement of the deity of Christ following the remark about his humanity. This is the natural and the obvious way of punctuating the sentence. To make a full stop after \sarka\ (or colon) and start a new sentence for the doxology is very abrupt and awkward. See strkjv@Acts:20:28; strkjv@Titus:2:13| for Paul's use of \theos\ applied to Jesus Christ.