KJV: A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.
YLT: pious, and fearing God with all his house, doing also many kind acts to the people, and beseeching God always,
Darby: pious, and fearing God with all his house, both giving much alms to the people, and supplicating God continually,
ASV: a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, who gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God always.
| εὐσεβὴς | devout |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: εὐσεβής Sense: pious, dutiful. |
|
| φοβούμενος | fearing |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Middle or Passive, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: φοβέομαι Sense: to put to flight by terrifying (to scare away). |
|
| τὸν | - |
|
Parse: Article, Accusative Masculine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| Θεὸν | God |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Singular Root: θεός Sense: a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities. |
|
| οἴκῳ | household |
|
Parse: Noun, Dative Masculine Singular Root: οἶκος Sense: a house. |
|
| αὐτοῦ | of him |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Genitive Masculine 3rd Person Singular Root: αὐτός Sense: himself, herself, themselves, itself. |
|
| ποιῶν | doing |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Active, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: ποιέω Sense: to make. |
|
| ἐλεημοσύνας | alms |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Feminine Plural Root: ἐλεημοσύνη Sense: mercy, pity. |
|
| πολλὰς | many |
|
Parse: Adjective, Accusative Feminine Plural Root: πολύς Sense: many, much, large. |
|
| τῷ | to the |
|
Parse: Article, Dative Masculine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| λαῷ | people |
|
Parse: Noun, Dative Masculine Singular Root: λαός Sense: a people, people group, tribe, nation, all those who are of the same stock and language. |
|
| δεόμενος | praying |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Middle or Passive, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: δέομαι Sense: to want, lack. |
|
| Θεοῦ | God |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Masculine Singular Root: θεός Sense: a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities. |
|
| διὰ | continually |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: διά Sense: through. |
|
Greek Commentary for Acts 10:2
Old word from eu (well) and sebomai (to worship, to reverence), but rare in the N.T. (Acts 10:2, Acts 10:7; 2 Peter 2:1). It might refer to a worshipful pagan (Acts 17:23, sebasmata objects of worship), but connected with “one that feared God” They had seats in the synagogue, but were not Jews. [source]
Doing many alms (the very phrase in Matthew 6:2), a characteristic mark of Jewish piety and from a Gentile to the Jewish people. Prayed (deomenos). Begging of God. Almsgiving and prayer were two of the cardinal points with the Jews (Jesus adds fasting in his picture of the Pharisee in Matthew 6:1-18). [source]
Begging of God. Almsgiving and prayer were two of the cardinal points with the Jews (Jesus adds fasting in his picture of the Pharisee in Matthew 6:1-18). [source]
See on godliness, 2 Peter 1:3. [source]
See on prayers, Luke 5:33.“Unheard by all but angel earsThe good Cornelius knelt alone,Nor dream'd his prayers and tearsWould help a world undone.“The while upon his terrac'd roofThe lov'd apostle to his Lord,In silent thought aloofFor heavenly vision soared.”Keble,Christian Year. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Acts 10:2
Christ responds to Peter's emphatic thou with another, equally emphatic. Peter says, “Thou art the Christ.” Christ replies, “Thou art Peter.” Πέτρος (Peter ) is used as a proper name, but without losing its meaning as a common noun. The name was bestowed on Simon at his first interview with Jesus (John 1:42) under the form of its Aramaic equivalent, CephasIn this passage attention is called, not to the giving of the name, but to its meaning. In classical Greek the word means a piece of rock, as in Homer, of Ajax throwing a stone at Hector (“Iliadvii., 270), or of Patroclus grasping and hiding in his hand a jagged stone (“Iliadxvi., 784).On this rock ( ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέρᾳ )The word is feminine, and means a rock, as distinguished from a stone or a fragment of rock ( πέτρος , above). Used of a ledge of rocks or a rocky peak. In Homer (“Odyssey,” ix., 243), the rock ( πέτρην ) which Polyphemus places at the door of his cavern, is a mass which two-and-twenty wagons could not remove; and the rock which he hurled at the retreating ships of Ulysses, created by its fall a wave in the sea which drove the ships back toward the land (“Odyssey,” ix., 484). The word refers neither to Christ as a rock, distinguished from Simon, a stone, nor to Peter's confession, but to Peter himself, in a sense defined by his previous confession, and as enlightened by the “Father in Heaven.” The reference of πέτρα to Christ is forced and unnatural. The obvious reference of the word is to Peter. The emphatic this naturally refers to the nearest antecedent; and besides, the metaphor is thus weakened, since Christ appears here, not as the foundation, but as the architect: “On this rock will I build.” Again, Christ is the great foundation, the “chief corner-stone,” but the New Testament writers recognize no impropriety in applying to the members of Christ's church certain terms which are applied to him. For instance, Peter himself (1 Peter 2:4), calls Christ a living stone, and, in 1 Peter 2:5, addresses the church as living stones. In Revelation 21:14, the names of the twelve apostles appear in the twelve foundation-stones of the heavenly city; and in Ephesians 2:20, it is said, “Ye are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets (i.e., laid by the apostles and prophets), Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone.” Equally untenable is the explanation which refers πέτρα to Simon's confession. Both the play upon the words and the natural reading of the passage are against it, and besides, it does not conform to the fact, since the church is built, not on confessions, but on confessors - living men. “The word πέτρα ,” says Edersheim, “was used in the same sense in Rabbinic language. According to the Rabbins, when God was about to build his world, he could not rear it on the generation of Enos, nor on that of the flood, who brought destruction upon the world; but when he beheld that Abraham would arise in the future, he said' 'Behold, I have found a rock to build on it, and to found the world,' whence, also, Abraham is called a rock, as it is said' 'Look unto the rock whence ye are hewn.' The parallel between Abraham and Peter might be carried even further. If, from a misunderstanding of the Lord's promise to Peter, later Christian legend represented the apostle as sitting at the gate of heaven, Jewish legend represents Abraham as sitting at the gate of Gehenna, so as to prevent all who had the seal of circumcision from falling into its abyss” (“Life and Times of Jesus”). The reference to Simon himself is confirmed by the actual relation of Peter to the early church, to the Jewish portion of which he was a foundation-stone. See Acts, Acts 1:15; Acts 2:14, Acts 2:37; Acts 3:12; Acts 4:8; Acts 5:15, Acts 5:29; Acts 9:34, Acts 9:40; Acts 10:25, Acts 10:26; Galatians 1:15.Church ( ἐκκλησίαν ) ἐκ out, καλέω , to call or summon. This is the first occurrence of this word in the New Testament. Originally an assembly of citizens, regularly summoned. So in New Testament, Acts 19:39. The Septuagint uses the word for the congregation of Israel, either as summoned for a definite purpose (Acts 7:38); but for this there is more commonly employed συναγωγή , of which synagogue is a transcription; σύν , together, ἄγω , to bring (Acts 13:43). In Christ's words to Peter the word ἐκκλησία acquires special emphasis from the opposition implied in it to the synagogue. The Christian community in the midst of Israel would be designated as ἐκκλησία , without being confounded with the συναγωγή , the Jewish community. See Acts 5:11; Acts 8:1; Acts 12:1; Acts 14:23, Acts 14:27, etc. Nevertheless συναγωγή is applied to a Christian assembly in James 2:2, while ἐπισυναγωγή (gathering or assembling together ) is found in 2 Thessalonians 2:1; Hebrews 10:25. Both in Hebrew and in New Testament usage ἐκκλησία implies more than a collective or national unity; rather a community based on a special religious idea and established in a special way. In the New Testament the term is used also in the narrower sense of a single church, or a church confined to a particular place. So of the church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla (Romans 16:5); the church at Corinth, the churches in Judea, the church at Jerusalem, etc.Gates of hell ( πύλαι ᾅδου )Rev., Hades. Hades was originally the name of the god who presided over the realm of the dead - Pluto or Dis. Hence the phrase, house of Hades. It is derived from ἀ , not, and; ἰδεῖν , to see; and signifies, therefore, the invisible land, the realm of shadow. It is the place to which all who depart this life descend, without reference to their moral character. By this word the Septuagint translated the Hebrew Sheol, which has a similar general meaning. The classical Hades embraced both good and bad men, though divided into Elysium, the abode of the virtuous, and Tartarus, the abode of the wicked. In these particulars it corresponds substantially with Sheol; both the godly and the wicked being represented as gathered into the latter. See Genesis 42:38; Psalm 9:17; Psalm 139:8; Isaiah 14:9; Isaiah 57:2; Ezekiel 32:27; Hosea 13:14. Hades and Sheol were alike conceived as a definite place, lower than the world. The passage of both good and bad into it was regarded as a descent. The Hebrew conception is that of a place of darkness; a cheerless home of a dull, joyless, shadowy life. See Psalm 6:5; Psalm 94:17; Psalm 115:17; Psalm 88:5, Psalm 88:6, Psalm 88:10; Job 10:21; Job 3:17-19; Job 14:10, Job 14:11; Ecclesiastes 9:5. Vagueness is its characteristic. In this the Hebrew's faith appears bare in contrast with that of the Greek and Roman. The pagan poets gave the popular mind definite pictures of Tartarus and Elysium; of Styx and Acheron; of happy plains where dead heroes held high discourse, and of black abysses where offenders underwent strange and ingenious tortures. There was, indeed, this difference between the Hebrew and the Pagan conceptions; that to the Pagan, Hades was the final home of its tenants, while Sheol was a temporary condition. Hence the patriarchs are described (Hebrews 11:16) as looking for a better, heavenly country; and the martyrs as enduring in hope of “a better resurrection.” Prophecy declared that the dead should arise and sing, when Sheol itself should be destroyed and its inmates brought forth, some to everlasting life, and others to shame and contempt (Isaiah 26:19; Hosea 13:14; Daniel 12:2). Paul represents this promise as made to the fathers by God, and as the hope of his countrymen (Acts 26:7). God was the God of the dead as well as of the living; present in the dark chambers of Sheol as well as in heaven (Psalm 139:8; Psalm 16:10). This is the underlying thought of that most touching and pathetic utterance of Job (Job 14:13-15), in which he breathes the wish that God would hide him with loving care in Hades, as a place of temporary concealment, where he will wait patiently, standing like a sentinel at his post, awaiting the divine voice calling him to a new and happier life. This, too, is the thought of the familiar and much-disputed passage, Job 19:23-27. His Redeemer, vindicator, avenger, shall arise after he shall have passed through the shadowy realm of Sheol. “A judgment in Hades, in which the judge will show himself his friend, in which all the tangled skein of his life will be unravelled by wise and kindly hands, and the insoluble problem of his strange and self-contradicting experience will at last be solved - this is what Job still looks for on that happy day when he shall see God for himself, and find his Goel (vindicator) in that Almighty Deliverer” (Cox, “Commentary on the Book of Job”). In the New Testament, Hades is the realm of the dead. It cannot be successfully maintained that it is, in particular, the place for sinners (so Cremer, “Biblico-Theological Lexicon”). The words about Capernaum (Matthew 11:23), which it is surprising to find Cremer citing in support of this position, are merely a rhetorical expression of a fall from the height of earthly glory to the deepest degradation, and have no more bearing upon the moral character of Hades than the words of Zophar (Job 11:7, Job 11:8) about the perfection of the Almighty. “It is high as heaven - deeper than Sheol. ” Hades is indeed coupled with Death (Revelation 1:18; Revelation 6:8; Revelation 20:13, Revelation 20:14), but the association is natural, and indeed inevitable, apart from all moral distinctions. Death would naturally be followed by Hades in any case. In Revelation 20:13, Revelation 20:14, the general judgment is predicted, and not only Death and Hades, but the sea give tip their dead, and only those who are not written in the book of life are cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:15). The rich man was in Hades (Luke 16:23), and in torments, but Lazarus was also in Hades, “in Abraham's bosom.” The details of this story “evidently represent the views current at the time among the Jews. According to them, the Garden of Eden and the Tree of Life were the abode of the blessed. We read that the righteous in Eden see the wicked in Gehenna and rejoice; and similarly, that the wicked in Gehenna see the righteous sitting beatified in Eden, and their souls are troubled (Edersheim, “Life and Times of Jesus”). Christ also was in Hades (Acts 2:27, Acts 2:31). Moreover, the word γέεννα , hell (see on Matthew 5:22), is specially used to denote the place of future punishment. Hades, then, in the New Testament, is a broad and general conception, with an idea of locality bound up with it. It is the condition following death, which is blessed or the contrary, according to the moral character of the dead, and is therefore divided into different realms, represented by Paradise or Abraham's bosom, and Gehenna. The expression Gates of Hades is an orientalism for the court, throne, power, and dignity of the infernal kingdom. Hades is contemplated as a mighty city, with formidable, frowning portals. Some expositors introduce also the idea of the councils of the Satanic powers, with reference to the Eastern custom of holding such deliberations in the gates of cities. Compare the expression Sublime Porte, applied to the Ottoman court. The idea of a building is maintained in both members of the comparison. The kingdom or city of Hades confronts and assaults the church which Christ will build upon the rock. See Job 38:17; Psalm 9:13; Psalm 107:18; Isaiah 38:10. [source]
Dative of the present middle participle. Here it is reverential fear as in Acts 10:2; Colossians 3:22. The bad sense of dread appears in Matthew 21:46; Mark 6:20; Luke 12:4. [source]
This genitive articular infinitive is not easy to explain. In Acts 10:25 there is another example where the genitive articular infinitive seems to be used as a nominative (Robertson, Grammar, p. 1040). The loose Hebrew infinitive construction may have a bearing here, but one may recall that the original infinitives were either locatives -Τα σκανδαλα Ta skandala is simply the accusative of general reference. Literally, the not coming as to occasions of stumbling. For σκανδαλον skandalon (a trap) See note on Matthew 5:29; and the note on Matthew 16:23. It is here only in Luke. The positive form of this saying appears in Matthew 18:7. [source]
The old word was αλλοπυλος allophulos (Acts 10:28), but αλλογενης allogenēs occurs in the lxx, Josephus, and inscriptions. Deissmann (Light from the Ancient East, p. 80) gives the inscription from the limestone block from the Temple of Israel in Jerusalem which uses this very word which may have been read by Jesus: Let no foreigner enter within the screen and enclosure surrounding the sanctuary (Μητενα αλλογενη εισπορευεσται εντος του περι το ιερον τρυπακτου και περιβολου Mēthena allogenē eisporeuesthai entos tou peri to hieron truphaktou kai peribolou). [source]
See on Acts 10:25. [source]
Only here in the New Testament. The kindred word, θεοσέβεια , godliness, occurs only at 1 Timothy 2:10. Compounded with Θεός , God, and σέβομαι , to worship, the same verb which appears in εὐσεβής , devout (Acts 10:2, Acts 10:7; Acts 22:12), and εὐσέβεια , godliness (Acts 3:12; 1 Timothy 2:2, etc.). See on 2 Peter 1:3. These two latter words, while they may mean reverence toward God, may also mean the due fulfillment of human relations; while θεοσεβὴς , worshipper of God, is limited to piety towards God. [source]
See on Acts 10:25. The word was used indefinitely in John 4:20. Here with the Father, thus defining true worship. [source]
Logos. This expression is the keynote and theme of the entire gospel. Λόγος is from the root λεγ , appearing in λέγω , the primitive meaning of which is to lay: then, to pick out, gather, pick up: hence to gather or put words together, and so, to speak. Hence λόγος is, first of all, a collecting or collection both of things in the mind, and of words by which they are expressed. It therefore signifies both the outward form by which the inward thought is expressed, and the inward thought itself, the Latin oratio and ratio: compare the Italian ragionare, “to think” and “to speak.” As signifying the outward form it is never used in the merely grammatical sense, as simply the name of a thing or act ( ἔπος, ὄνομα, ῥῆμα ), but means a word as the thing referred to: the material, not the formal part: a word as embodying a conception or idea. See, for instance, Matthew 22:46; 1 Corinthians 14:9, Proverbs 8:26-311. Hence it signifies a saying, of God, or of man (Matthew 19:21, Matthew 19:22; Mark 5:35, Mark 5:36): a decree, a precept (Romans 9:28; Mark 7:13). The ten commandments are called in the Septuagint, οἱ δέκα λόγοι , “the ten words ” (Exodus 34:28), and hence the familiar term decalogue. It is further used of discourse: either of the act of speaking (Acts 14:12), of skill and practice in speaking (Acts 18:15; 2 Timothy 4:15), specifically the doctrine of salvation through Christ (Matthew 13:20-23; Philemon 1:14); of narrative, both the relation and the thing related (Acts 1:1; John 21:23; Mark 1:45); of matter under discussion, an affair, a case in law (Acts 15:6; Acts 19:38). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- As signifying the inward thought, it denotes the faculty of thinking and reasoning (Hebrews 4:12); regard or consideration (Acts 20:24); reckoning, account (Philemon 4:15, Philemon 4:17; Hebrews 4:13); cause or reason (Acts 10:29). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- John uses the word in a peculiar sense, here, and in John 1:14; and, in this sense, in these two passages only. The nearest approach to it is in Revelation 19:13, where the conqueror is called the Word of God; and it is recalled in the phrases Word of Life, and the Life was manifested (1 John 1:1, 1 John 1:2). Compare Hebrews 4:12. It was a familiar and current theological term when John wrote, and therefore he uses it without explanation. Old Testament Usage of the TermThe word here points directly to Psalm href="/desk/?q=ps+33:6&sr=1">Psalm 33:6). The idea of God, who is in his own nature hidden, revealing himself in creation, is the root of the Logos-idea, in contrast with all materialistic or pantheistic conceptions of creation. This idea develops itself in the Old Testament on three lines. (1) The Word, as embodying the divine will, is personified in Hebrew poetry. Consequently divine attributes are predicated of it as being the continuous revelation of God in law and prophecy (Psalm 3:4; Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 119:105). The Word is a healer in Psalm 107:20; a messenger in Psalm 147:15; the agent of the divine decrees in Isaiah 55:11. (2) The personified wisdom (Job 28:12sq.; Job 28). Even Death, which unlocks so many secrets, and the underworld, know it only as a rumor (Job href="/desk/?q=job+28:22&sr=1">Job 28:22). It is only God who knows its way and its place (Job 28:23). He made the world, made the winds and the waters, made a decree for the rain and a way for the lightning of the thunder (Job 28:25, Job 28:26). He who possessed wisdom in the beginning of his way, before His works of old, before the earth with its depths and springs and mountains, with whom was wisdom as one brought up with Him (1714032965_55), declared it. “It became, as it were, objective, so that He beheld it” (Job 28:27) and embodied it in His creative work. This personification, therefore, is based on the thought that wisdom is not shut up at rest in God, but is active and manifest in the world. “She standeth in the top of high places, by the way in the places of the paths. She crieth at the gates, at the entry of the city, at the coming in at the doors” (Proverbs 8:2, Proverbs 8:3). She builds a palace and prepares a banquet, and issues a general invitation to the simple and to him that wanteth understanding (Proverbs 9:1-6). It is viewed as the one guide to salvation, comprehending all revelations of God, and as an attribute embracing and combining all His other attributes. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (3) The Angel of Jehovah. The messenger of God who serves as His agent in the world of sense, and is sometimes distinguished from Jehovah and sometimes identical with him (Genesis 16:7-13; Genesis 32:24-28; Hosea 12:4, Hosea 12:5; Exodus 23:20, Exodus 23:21; Malachi 3:1). Apocryphal UsageIn the Apocryphal writings this mediative element is more distinctly apprehended, but with a tendency to pantheism. In the Wisdom of Solomon (at least 100 b.c.), where wisdom seems to be viewed as another name for the whole divine nature, while nowhere connected with the Messiah, it is described as a being of light, proceeding essentially from God; a true image of God, co-occupant of the divine throne; a real and independent principle, revealing God in the world and mediating between it and Him, after having created it as his organ - in association with a spirit which is called μονογενές , only begotten (7:22). “She is the breath of the power of God, and a pure influence flowing from the glory of the Almighty; therefore can no defiled thing fall into her. For she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of his goodness” (see chapter 7, throughout). Again: “Wisdom reacheth from one end to another mightily, and sweetly doth she order all things. In that she is conversant with God, she magnifieth her nobility: yea, the Lord of all things Himself loved her. For she is privy to the mysteries of the knowledge of God, and a lover of His works. Moreover, by the means of her I shall obtain immortality, and leave behind me an everlasting memorial to them that come after me” (chapter 9). In 16:12, it is said, “Thy word, O Lord, healeth all things” (compare Psalm 107:20); and in 18:15,16, “Thine almighty word leaped from heaven out of thy royal throne, as a fierce man of war into the midst of a land of destruction, and brought thine unfeigned commandment as a sharp sword, and, standing up, filled all things with death; and it touched the heaven, but it stood upon the earth.” See also Wisdom of Sirach, chapters 1,24, and Genesis href="/desk/?q=ge+39:21&sr=1">Genesis 39:21, they paraphrase, “The Memra was with Joseph in prison.” In Psalm 110:1-7Jehovah addresses the first verse to the Memra. The Memra is the angel that destroyed the first-born of Egypt, and it was the Memra that led the Israelites in the cloudy pillar. Usage in the Judaeo-Alexandrine PhilosophyFrom the time of Ptolemy I: (323-285 b.c.), there were Jews in great numbers in Egypt. Philo (a.d. 50) estimates them at a million in his time. Alexandria was their headquarters. They had their own senate and magistrates, and possessed the same privileges as the Greeks. The Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek (b.c. 280-150) was the beginning of a literary movement among them, the key-note of which was the reconciliation of Western culture and Judaism, the establishment of a connection between the Old Testament faith and the Greek philosophy. Hence they interpreted the facts of sacred history allegorically, and made them symbols of certain speculative principles, alleging that the Greek philosophers had borrowed their wisdom from Moses. Aristobulus (about 150 b.c.) asserted the existence of a previous and much older translation of the law, and dedicated to Ptolemy VI an allegorical exposition of the Pentateuch, in which he tried to show that the doctrines of the Peripatetic or Aristotelian school were derived from the Old Testament. Most of the schools of Greek philosophy were represented among the Alexandrian Jews, but the favorite one was the Platonic. The effort at reconciliation culminated in Philo, a contemporary of Christ. Philo was intimately acquainted with the Platonic philosophy, and made it the fundamental feature of his own doctrines, while availing himself likewise of ideas belonging to the Peripatetic and Stoic schools. Unable to discern the difference in the points of view from which these different doctrines severally proceeded, he jumbled together not merely discordant doctrines of the Greek schools, but also those of the East, regarding the wisdom of the Greeks as having originated in the legislation and writings of Moses. He gathered together from East and West every element that could help to shape his conception of a vicegerent of God, “a mediator between the eternal and the ephemeral. His Logos reflects light from countless facets.” According to Philo, God is the absolute Being. He calls God “that which is:” “the One and the All.” God alone exists for himself, without multiplicity and without mixture. No name can properly be ascribed to Him: He simply is. Hence, in His nature, He is unknowable. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Outside of God there exists eternal matter, without form and void, and essentially evil; but the perfect Being could not come into direct contact with the senseless and corruptible; so that the world could not have been created by His direct agency. Hence the doctrine of a mediating principle between God and matter - the divine Reason, the Logos in whom are comprised all the ideas of finite things, and who created the sensible world by causing these ideas to penetrate into matter. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The absolute God is surrounded by his powers ( δυνάμεις ) as a king by his servants. These powers are, in Platonic language, ideas; in Jewish, angels; but all are essentially one, and their unity, as they exist in God, as they emanate from him, as they are disseminated in the world, is expressed by Logos Hence the Logos appears under a twofold aspect: (1) As the immanent reason of God, containing within itself the world-ideal, which, while not outwardly existing, is like the immanent reason in man. This is styled Λόγος ἐνδιάθετος , i.e., the Logos conceived and residing in the mind. This was the aspect emphasized by the Alexandrians, and which tended to the recognition of a twofold personality in the divine essence. (2) As the outspoken word, proceeding from God and manifest in the world. This, when it has issued from God in creating the world, is the Λόγος προφορικός , i.e., the Logos uttered, even as in man the spoken word is the manifestation of thought. This aspect prevailed in Palestine, where the Word appears like the angel of the Pentateuch, as the medium of the outward communication of God with men, and tends toward the recognition of a divine person subordinate to God. Under the former aspect, the Logos is, really, one with God's hidden being: the latter comprehends all the workings and revelations of God in the world; affords from itself the ideas and energies by which the world was framed and is upheld; and, filling all things with divine light and life, rules them in wisdom, love, and righteousness. It is the beginning of creation, not inaugurated, like God, nor made, like the world; but the eldest son of the eternal Father (the world being the younger); God's image; the mediator between God and the world; the highest angel; the second God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Philo's conception of the Logos, therefore, is: the sum-total and free exercise of the divine energies; so that God, so far as he reveals himself, is called Logos; while the Logos, so far as he reveals God, is called God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- John's doctrine and terms are colored by these preceding influences. During his residence at Ephesus he must have become familiar with the forms and terms of the Alexandrian theology. Nor is it improbable that he used the term Logos with an intent to facilitate the passage from the current theories of his time to the pure gospel which he proclaimed. “To those Hellenists and Hellenistic Jews, on the one hand, who were vainly philosophizing on the relations of the finite and infinite; to those investigators of the letter of the Scriptures, on the other, who speculated about the theocratic revelations, John said, by giving this name Logos to Jesus: 'The unknown Mediator between God and the world, the knowledge of whom you are striving after, we have seen, heard, and touched. Your philosophical speculations and your scriptural subtleties will never raise you to Him. Believe as we do in Jesus, and you will possess in Him that divine Revealer who engages your thoughts'” (Godet). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- But John's doctrine is not Philo's, and does not depend upon it. The differences between the two are pronounced. Though both use the term Logos, they use it with utterly different meanings. In John it signifies word, as in Holy Scripture generally; in Philo, reason; and that so distinctly that when Philo wishes to give it the meaning of word, he adds to it by way of explanation, the term ῥῆμα , word. The nature of the being described by Logos is conceived by each in an entirely different spirit. John's Logos is a person, with a consciousness of personal distinction; Philo's is impersonal. His notion is indeterminate and fluctuating, shaped by the influence which happens to be operating at the time. Under the influence of Jewish documents he styles the Logos an “archangel;” under the influence of Plato, “the Idea of Ideas;” of the Stoics, “the impersonal Reason.” It is doubtful whether Philo ever meant to represent the Logos formally as a person. All the titles he gives it may be explained by supposing it to mean the ideal world on which the actual is modeled. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In Philo, moreover, the function of the Logos is confined to the creation and preservation of the universe. He does not identify or connect him with the Messiah. His doctrine was, to a great degree, a philosophical substitute for Messianic hopes. He may have conceived of the Word as acting through the Messiah, but not as one with him. He is a universal principle. In John the Messiah is the Logos himself, uniting himself with humanity, and clothing himself with a body in order to save the world. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The two notions differ as to origin. The impersonal God of Philo cannot pass to the finite creation without contamination of his divine essence. Hence an inferior agent must be interposed. John's God, on the other hand, is personal, and a loving personality. He is a Father (John 1:18); His essence is love (John 3:16; 1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16). He is in direct relation with the world which He desires to save, and the Logos is He Himself, manifest in the flesh. According to Philo, the Logos is not coexistent with the eternal God. Eternal matter is before him in time. According to John, the Logos is essentially with the Father from all eternity (John 1:2), and it is He who creates all things, matter included (John 1:3). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Philo misses the moral energy of the Hebrew religion as expressed in its emphasis upon the holiness of Jehovah, and therefore fails to perceive the necessity of a divine teacher and Savior. He forgets the wide distinction between God and the world, and declares that, were the universe to end, God would die of loneliness and inactivity. The Meaning of Logos in JohnAs Logos has the double meaning of thought and speech, so Christ is related to God as the word to the idea, the word being not merely a name for the idea, but the idea itself expressed. The thought is the inward word (Dr. Schaff compares the Hebrew expression “I speak in my heart” for “I think”). The Logos of John is the real, personal God (John 1:1), the Word, who was originally before the creation with God. and was God, one in essence and nature, yet personally distinct (John 1:1, John 1:18); the revealer and interpreter of the hidden being of God; the reflection and visible image of God, and the organ of all His manifestations to the world. Compare Hebrews 1:3. He made all things, proceeding personally from God for the accomplishment of the act of creation (Hebrews 1:3), and became man in the person of Jesus Christ, accomplishing the redemption of the world. Compare Philemon 2:6. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The following is from William Austin, “Meditation for Christmas Day,” cited by Ford on John:-DIVIDER- “The name Word is most excellently given to our Savior; for it expresses His nature in one, more than in any others. Therefore St. John, when he names the Person in the Trinity (1 John 5:7), chooses rather to call Him Word than Son; for word is a phrase more communicable than son. Son hath only reference to the Father that begot Him; but word may refer to him that conceives it; to him that speaks it; to that which is spoken by it; to the voice that it is clad in; and to the effects it raises in him that hears it. So Christ, as He is the Word, not only refers to His Father that begot Him, and from whom He comes forth, but to all the creatures that were made by Him; to the flesh that He took to clothe Him; and to the doctrine He brought and taught, and, which lives yet in the hearts of all them that obediently do hear it. He it is that is this Word; and any other, prophet or preacher, he is but a voice (Luke 3:4). Word is an inward conception of the mind; and voice is but a sign of intention. St. John was but a sign, a voice; not worthy to untie the shoe-latchet of this Word. Christ is the inner conception 'in the bosom of His Father;' and that is properly the Word. And yet the Word is the intention uttered forth, as well as conceived within; for Christ was no less the Word in the womb of the Virgin, or in the cradle of the manger, or on the altar of the cross, than he was in the beginning, 'in the bosom of his Father.' For as the intention departs not from the mind when the word is uttered, so Christ, proceeding from the Father by eternal generation, and after here by birth and incarnation, remains still in Him and with Him in essence; as the intention, which is conceived and born in the mind, remains still with it and in it, though the word be spoken. He is therefore rightly called the Word, both by His coming from, and yet remaining still in, the Father.”And the WordA repetition of the great subject, with solemn emphasis.Was with God ( ἦν πὸς τὸν Θεὸν )Anglo-Saxon vers., mid Gode. Wyc., at God. With ( πρός ) does not convey the full meaning, that there is no single English word which will give it better. The preposition πρός , which, with the accusative case, denotes motion towards, or direction, is also often used in the New Testament in the sense of with; and that not merely as being near or beside, but as a living union and communion; implying the active notion of intercourse. Thus: “Are not his sisters here with us ” ( πρὸς ἡμᾶς ), i.e., in social relations with us (Mark 6:3; Matthew 13:56). “How long shall I be with you ” ( πρὸς ὑμᾶς , Mark 9:16). “I sat daily with you ” (Matthew 26:55). “To be present with the Lord ” ( πρὸς τὸν Κύριον , 2 Corinthians 5:8). “Abide and winter with you ” (1 Corinthians 16:6). “The eternal life which was with the Father ” ( πρὸς τὸν πατέρα , 1 John 1:2). Thus John's statement is that the divine Word not only abode with the Father from all eternity, but was in the living, active relation of communion with Him.And the Word was God ( καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος )In the Greek order, and God was the Word, which is followed by Anglo-Saxon, Wyc., and Tynd. But θεὸς , God, is the predicate and not the subject of the proposition. The subject must be the Word; for John is not trying to show who is God, but who is the Word. Notice that Θεὸς is without the article, which could not have been omitted if he had meant to designate the word as God; because, in that event, Θεὸς would have been ambiguous; perhaps a God. Moreover, if he had said God was the Word, he would have contradicted his previous statement by which he had distinguished (hypostatically) God from the word, and λόγος (Logos) would, further, have signified only an attribute of God. The predicate is emphatically placed in the proposition before the subject, because of the progress of the thought; this being the third and highest statement respecting the Word - the climax of the two preceding propositions. The word God, used attributively, maintains the personal distinction between God and the Word, but makes the unity of essence and nature to follow the distinction of person, and ascribes to the Word all the attributes of the divine essence. “There is something majestic in the way in which the description of the Logos, in the three brief but great propositions of John 1:1, is unfolded with increasing fullness” (Meyer). [source]
Dramatic historical present of αγω agō plural “they” for the Sanhedrists (Luke 23:1). John gives no details of the trial before the Sanhedrin (only the fact, John 18:24, John 18:28) when Caiaphas presided, either the informal meeting at night (Mark 14:53, Mark 14:55-65; Matthew 26:57, Matthew 26:59-68; Luke 22:54, Luke 22:63-65) or the formal ratification meeting after dawn (Mark 15:1; Matthew 27:1; Luke 22:66-71), but he gives much new material of the trial before Pilate (John 18:28-38). Into the palace For the history and meaning of this interesting Latin word, praetorium, see note on Matthew 27:27; note on Acts 23:35; and note on Philemon 1:13. Here it is probably the magnificent palace in Jerusalem built by Herod the Great for himself and occupied by the Roman Procurator (governor) when in the city. There was also one in Caesarea (Acts 23:35). Herod‘s palace in Jerusalem was on the Hill of Zion in the western part of the upper city. There is something to be said for the Castle of Antonia, north of the temple area, as the location of Pilate‘s residence in Jerusalem. Early Technically the fourth watch (3 a.m. to 6 a.m.). There were two violations of Jewish legal procedure (holding the trial for a capital case at night, passing condemnation on the same day of the trial). Besides, the Sanhedrin no longer had the power of death. A Roman court could meet any time after sunrise. John (John 19:14) says it was “about the sixth hour” when Pilate condemned Jesus. That they might not be defiled Purpose clause with ινα μη hina mē and first aorist passive subjunctive of μιαινω miainō to stain, to defile. For Jewish scruples about entering the house of a Gentile see Acts 10:28; Acts 11:3. But might eat the passover Second aorist active subjunctive of the defective verb εστιω esthiō to eat. This phrase may mean to eat the passover meal as in Matthew 27:17 (Mark 14:12, Mark 14:14; Luke 22:11, Luke 22:15), but it does not have to mean that. In 2 Chronicles 30:22 we read: “And they did eat the festival seven days” when the paschal festival is meant, not the paschal lamb or the paschal supper. There are eight other examples of πασχα pascha in John‘s Gospel and in all of them the feast is meant, not the supper. If we follow John‘s use of the word, it is the feast here, not the meal of John 13:2 which was the regular passover meal. This interpretation keeps John in harmony with the Synoptics. [source]
και προσεκυνησεν αυτωι Kurie here = Lord (reverence, no longer respect as in John 9:36). A short creed, but to the point. And he worshipped him (προσκυνεω kai prosekunēsen autōi). Ingressive first aorist active indicative of proskuneō old verb to fall down in reverence, to worship. Sometimes of men (Matthew 18:26). In John (see John 4:20) this verb “is always used to express divine worship” (Bernard). It is tragic to hear men today deny that Jesus should be worshipped. He accepted worship from this new convert as he later did from Thomas who called him “God” (John 20:28). Peter (Acts 10:25.) refused worship from Cornelius as Paul and Barnabas did at Lystra (Acts 14:18), but Jesus made no protest here. [source]
The former of these two words, rendered were called, meant, originally, to transact business, to have dealings with; thence, in the course of business, to give audience to, to answer, from which comes its use to denote the responses of an oracle; a divine advice or warning. See Acts 10:22; and compare Matthew 2:12; Hebrews 11:7. Later, it acquires the meaning to bear a name; tobe called, with the implication of a name used in the ordinary transactions and intercourse of men; the name under which one passes. This process of transition appears in the practice of naming men according to their occupations, as, in English, “John the Smith,” “Philip the Armorer;” a practice which is the origin of many familiar family names, such as Butler, Carpenter, Smith, Cooper. Compare in New Testament Alexander the coppersmith (2 Timothy 4:14); Matthew the publican (Matthew 10:3); Luke the physician (Colossians 4:14); Erastus the chamberlain (Romans 16:23); Rahab the harlot (Hebrews 11:31). In the same line is the use of the word calling, to denote one's business. The meaning of the word in this passage is illustrated by Romans 7:3. The disciples were called. They did not assume the name themselves. It occurs in only three passages in the New Testament: here; Acts 26:28; and 1 Peter 4:16; and only in the last-named passage is used by a Christian of a Christian. The name was evidently not given by the Jews of Antioch, to whom Christ was the interpretation of Messiah, and who wouldn't have bestowed that name on those whom they despised as apostates. The Jews designated the Christians as Nazarenes (Acts 24:5), a term of contempt, because it was a proverb that nothing good could come out of Nazareth (John 1:47), The name was probably not assumed by the disciples themselves; for they were in the habit of styling each other believers, disciples, saints, brethren, those of the way. It, doubtless, was bestowed by the Gentiles. Some suppose that it was applied as a term of ridicule, and cite the witty and sarcastic character of the people of Antioch, and their notoriety for inventing names of derision; but this is doubtful. The name may have been given simply as a distinctive title, naturally chosen from the recognized and avowed devotion of the disciples to Christ as their leader. The Antiochenes mistook the nature of the name, not understanding its use among the disciples as an official title- the Anointed - but-DIVIDER- using it as apersonal name, which they converted into a party name. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
Old word from eu (well) and sebomai (to worship, to reverence), but rare in the N.T. (Acts 10:2, Acts 10:7; 2 Peter 2:1). It might refer to a worshipful pagan (Acts 17:23, sebasmata objects of worship), but connected with “one that feared God” They had seats in the synagogue, but were not Jews. [source]
Ingressive second aorist active participle, not present. So punctiliar, “saw come,” not “saw coming.” So also “say” or “speak,” not “saying.” Luke repeats the account of this vision to Cornelius twice (Acts 10:30; Acts 11:13) and also the story of the vision to Peter (10:1-16, Acts 10:28; Acts 11:5). [source]
First aorist middle (indirect, for one‘s self) imperative of metapempō usual voice in ancient Greek with this verb in sense of sending another for one‘s own sake. Only in Acts in the N.T. See also Acts 10:22. [source]
Locative case of article with the compound adverb (hēmerāi day being understood), the second day after leaving Caesarea, 28 miles from Joppa. The third day (the next morrow, Acts 10:23) they start back home and the fourth day (on the morrow again, Acts 10:24) they reach Caesarea. [source]
Second aorist active indicative, I never did anything like this and I shall not do it now. The use of pan (everything) with oudepote (never) is like the Hebrew Common and unclean (Koinon kai akatharton). Koinos from epic xunos (xunsun together with) originally meant common to several (Latin communis) as in Acts 2:44; Acts 4:32; Titus 1:4; Judges 1:3. The use seen here (also Mark 7:2, Mark 7:5; Romans 14:14; Hebrews 10:29; Revelation 21:27; Acts 10:28; Acts 11:8), like Latin vulgaris is unknown in ancient Greek. Here the idea is made plain by the addition of akatharton (unclean), ceremonially unclean, of course. We have the same double use in our word “common.” See notes on Mark 7:18. where Mark adds the remarkable participle katharizōn (making all meats clean), evidently from Peter who recalls this vision. Peter had been reared from childhood to make the distinction between clean and unclean food and this new proposal even from the Lord runs against all his previous training. He did not see that some of God‘s plans for the Jews could be temporary. This symbol of the sheet was to show Peter ultimately that Gentiles could be saved without becoming Jews. At this moment he is in spiritual and intellectual turmoil. [source]
“Cornelius was not an idolator and would not have honoured Peter as a god” (Furneaux). The word probably means here reverence like old English usage (Wycliff) and not actual worship, though Peter took it that way (Acts 10:26). Jesus accepted such worship (Matthew 8:2; Luke 5:8 by Peter). [source]
So Westcott and Hort (first aorist active participle) instead of μηδεν διακρινομενον mēden diakrinomenon “nothing doubting” (present middle participle) like Acts 10:20. The difference in voice shows the distinction in meaning. [source]
First aorist middle imperative. Third time mentioned (Acts 10:5, Acts 10:22; Acts 11:13). Perhaps Peter is anxious to make it plain that he did not go of his own initiative into the house of Cornelius. He went under God‘s direct orders. [source]
Not here strictly a tree, but wood as already in Acts 5:30; Acts 10:29 and later in Galatians 3:13. Strictly speaking, it was Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus who took the body of Jesus down from the cross, though the Jews had asked Pilate to have the bones of Jesus broken that his body should not remain on the cross during the Sabbath (John 19:31). Paul does not distinguish the details here. [source]
Second aorist active indicative of προσπιπτω prospiptō old verb. An act of worship as Cornelius before Peter (Acts 10:25), when προσεκυνησεν prosekunēsen is used. [source]
First aorist passive of this strong word κολλαω kollaō to glue to, common in Acts (Acts 5:13; Acts 8:29; Acts 9:26; Acts 10:28) No sermon is a failure which leads a group of men (ανδρες andres) to believe (ingressive aorist of πιστευω pisteuō) in Jesus Christ. Many so-called great or grand sermons reap no such harvest. [source]
Koinos from epic xunos (xunsun together with) originally meant common to several (Latin communis) as in Acts 2:44; Acts 4:32; Titus 1:4; Judges 1:3. The use seen here (also Mark 7:2, Mark 7:5; Romans 14:14; Hebrews 10:29; Revelation 21:27; Acts 10:28; Acts 11:8), like Latin vulgaris is unknown in ancient Greek. Here the idea is made plain by the addition of akatharton (unclean), ceremonially unclean, of course. We have the same double use in our word “common.” See notes on Mark 7:18. where Mark adds the remarkable participle katharizōn (making all meats clean), evidently from Peter who recalls this vision. Peter had been reared from childhood to make the distinction between clean and unclean food and this new proposal even from the Lord runs against all his previous training. He did not see that some of God‘s plans for the Jews could be temporary. This symbol of the sheet was to show Peter ultimately that Gentiles could be saved without becoming Jews. At this moment he is in spiritual and intellectual turmoil. [source]
“Men having uncircumcision.” It is a contemptuous expression. They did not object to Peter‘s preaching to the Gentiles, but to his going into the house of Cornelius and eating with them, violating his supposed obligations as a Jew (Hackett). It was the same complaint in principle that the Pharisees had made against Jesus when he ate with publicans and sinners (Luke 15:12). The Jews had not merely the Mosaic regulations about clean and unclean food, but also the fact that at a Gentile table some of the meat may have been an idol sacrifice. And Peter himself had similar scruples when the vision came to him at Joppa and when he entered the house of Cornelius in Caesarea Acts 10:28). Peter had been led beyond the circumcision party. [source]
First aorist passive infinitive of συναγω sunagō old verb, probably here to meet together as in Matthew 28:12. In Acts 14:27 the verb is used of gathering together the church, but here εν τηι εκκλησιαι en tēi ekklēsiāi excludes that idea. Barnabas met together “in the church” (note first use of the word for the disciples at Antioch). This peculiar phrase accents the leadership and co-operation of Barnabas and Saul in teaching And that the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch (χρηματισαι τε πρωτως εν Αντιοχειαι τους ματητας Χριστιανους chrēmatisai te prōtōs en Antiocheiāi tous mathētas Christianous). This first active infinitive χρηματισαι chrēmatisai is also a subject of εγενετο egeneto and is added as a separate item by the use of τε te rather than και kai For the word itself in the sense of divine command, see note on Matthew 2:12, note on Matthew 2:22; note on Luke 2:26; and note on Acts 10:22. Here and in Romans 7:3 it means to be called or named (assuming a name from one‘s business, χρημα chrēma from χραομαι chraomai to use or to do business). Polybius uses it in this sense as here. Τους ματητας Tous mathētas (the disciples) is in the accusative of general reference with the infinitive. Χριστιανους Christianous (Christians) is simply predicate accusative. This word is made after the pattern of εροδιανυς Herodianus (Matthew 22:16, ερωιδιανοι Herōidianoi followers of Herod), Χαεσαριανυς Caesarianus a follower of Caesar (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, p. 377, gives papyri examples of the genitive Καισαρος Kaisaros meaning also “belonging to Caesar” like the common adjective Χαεσαριανυς Caesarianus). It is made thus like a Latin adjective, though it is a Greek word, and it refers to the Hebrew belief in a Messiah (Page). The name was evidently given to the followers of Christ by the Gentiles to distinguish them from the Jews since they were Greeks, not Grecian Jews. The Jews would not call them Christians because of their own use of Χριστος Christos the Messiah. The Jews termed them Galileans or Nazarenes. The followers of Christ called themselves disciples (learners), believers, brethren, saints, those of the Way. The three uses of Christian in the N.T. are from the heathen standpoint (here), Acts 26:28 (a term of contempt in the mouth of Agrippa), and 1 Peter 4:16 (persecution from the Roman government). It is a clear distinction from both Jews and Gentiles and it is not strange that it came into use first here in Antioch when the large Greek church gave occasion for it. Later Ignatius was bishop in Antioch and was given to the lions in Rome, and John Chrysostom preached here his wonderful sermons. [source]
Genitive absolute with ουν oun (therefore). Undeniable (αν αντι ρητος anαναντιρητως antiδεον εστιν rātos), verbal adjective. Occasionally in late Greek (Polybius, etc.), only here in N.T., but adverb δει anantirētōs in Acts 10:29. These legends were accepted as true and appeased the mob. [source]
Second perfect active participle of οιδα oida with μη mē That shall befall me (τα συναντησοντα εμοι ta sunantēsonta emoi). Articular future active participle of συνανταω sunantaō to meet with (Acts 10:25), to befall (with associative instrumental case) and compare with συμβαντων sumbantōn (befell) in Acts 20:19. One of the rare instances of the future participle in the N.T. [source]
Articular future active participle of συνανταω sunantaō to meet with (Acts 10:25), to befall (with associative instrumental case) and compare with συμβαντων sumbantōn (befell) in Acts 20:19. One of the rare instances of the future participle in the N.T. [source]
This Greek name Entertained us Paul and his companions (Luke and Aristarchus). Was Julius included? On χενιζω xenizō see note on Acts 10:23. Courteously (πιλοπρονως philophronōs). This old adverb from πιλοπρων philophrōn (πιλοσ πρεν philos phren friendly mind) occurs here alone in the N.T. In a kindly or friendly manner, all the more so because of the original suspicion of Paul as a criminal. [source]
Present middle infinitive of κολλαω kollaō old verb to cleave to like glue as in Luke 15:15 which see. Seven times in Acts (Acts 9:26; Acts 10:28; Acts 17:34). The outsiders (the rest) preferred, many of them, to remain outside for the present, especially the rulers. Howbeit the people (αλλο λαος all'̇̇ho laos). Probably individuals among the people, the populace as distinct from the rulers and hostile outsiders. [source]
This first active infinitive χρηματισαι chrēmatisai is also a subject of εγενετο egeneto and is added as a separate item by the use of τε te rather than και kai For the word itself in the sense of divine command, see note on Matthew 2:12, note on Matthew 2:22; note on Luke 2:26; and note on Acts 10:22. Here and in Romans 7:3 it means to be called or named (assuming a name from one‘s business, χρημα chrēma from χραομαι chraomai to use or to do business). Polybius uses it in this sense as here. Τους ματητας Tous mathētas (the disciples) is in the accusative of general reference with the infinitive. Χριστιανους Christianous (Christians) is simply predicate accusative. This word is made after the pattern of εροδιανυς Herodianus (Matthew 22:16, ερωιδιανοι Herōidianoi followers of Herod), Χαεσαριανυς Caesarianus a follower of Caesar (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, p. 377, gives papyri examples of the genitive Καισαρος Kaisaros meaning also “belonging to Caesar” like the common adjective Χαεσαριανυς Caesarianus). It is made thus like a Latin adjective, though it is a Greek word, and it refers to the Hebrew belief in a Messiah (Page). The name was evidently given to the followers of Christ by the Gentiles to distinguish them from the Jews since they were Greeks, not Grecian Jews. The Jews would not call them Christians because of their own use of Χριστος Christos the Messiah. The Jews termed them Galileans or Nazarenes. The followers of Christ called themselves disciples (learners), believers, brethren, saints, those of the Way. The three uses of Christian in the N.T. are from the heathen standpoint (here), Acts 26:28 (a term of contempt in the mouth of Agrippa), and 1 Peter 4:16 (persecution from the Roman government). It is a clear distinction from both Jews and Gentiles and it is not strange that it came into use first here in Antioch when the large Greek church gave occasion for it. Later Ignatius was bishop in Antioch and was given to the lions in Rome, and John Chrysostom preached here his wonderful sermons. [source]
Old adjective from ομοιος homoios (like) and πασχω paschō to experience. In the N.T. only here and 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 (Acts 10:25.). υμιν Humin is associative instrumental case. And bring you good tidings (ευαγγελιζομενοι 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 Acts 17:21-32; 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 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 (επι τεον ζωντα epi theon zōnta). They must go the whole way. Our God is a live God, not a dead statue. Paul is fond of this phrase (2 Corinthians 6:16; Romans 9:26). Who made 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 Psalm 146:6 and has Genesis 1:1 in mind. See also 1 Thessalonians 1:9 where a new allegiance is also claimed as here. [source]
Probably the Eucharist to observe which ordinance Paul had come and tarried (Acts 20:7), though some scholars distinguish between what took place in Acts 20:7 and Acts 20:11, needlessly so as was stated on Acts 20:7. And eaten (και γευσαμενος kai geusamenos). The word is used in Acts 10:10 of eating an ordinary meal and so might apply to the Αγαπη Agapē but it suits equally for the Eucharist. The accident had interrupted Paul‘s sermon so that it was observed now and then Paul resumed his discourse. And had talked with them a long while Luke, as we have seen, is fond of ικανος hikanos for periods of time, for a considerable space of time, “even till break of day” Old word for brightness, radiance like German Auge, English eye, only here in the N.T. Occurs in the papyri and in modern Greek for dawn. This second discourse lasted from midnight till dawn and was probably more informal (as in Acts 10:27) and conversational He had much to say before he left. So he departed (ουτως εχηλτεν houtōs exēlthen). Thus Luke sums up the result. Paul left (went forth) only after all the events narrated by the numerous preceding participles had taken place. Effective aorist active indicative εχελτεν exelthen ουτως Houtōs here equals τυμ δεμυμ tum demum now at length (Acts 27:7) as Page shows. [source]
Luke, as we have seen, is fond of ικανος hikanos for periods of time, for a considerable space of time, “even till break of day” Old word for brightness, radiance like German Auge, English eye, only here in the N.T. Occurs in the papyri and in modern Greek for dawn. This second discourse lasted from midnight till dawn and was probably more informal (as in Acts 10:27) and conversational He had much to say before he left. So he departed (ουτως εχηλτεν houtōs exēlthen). Thus Luke sums up the result. Paul left (went forth) only after all the events narrated by the numerous preceding participles had taken place. Effective aorist active indicative εχελτεν exelthen ουτως Houtōs here equals τυμ δεμυμ tum demum now at length (Acts 27:7) as Page shows. [source]
Nominative plural participle agreeing with τινες tines understood, not with case of ματητων mathētōn One Mnason of Cyprus, an early disciple, with whom we should lodge (παρ ωι χενιστωμεν Μνασωνι τινι Κυπριωι αρχαιωι ματητηι par hōi xenisthōmen Mnasnōi tini Kupriōi archaiōi mathētēi). A thoroughly idiomatic Greek idiom, incorporation and attraction of the antecedent into the relative clause (Robertson, Grammar, p. 718). Μνασωνι Mnasōni is really the object of αγοντες agontes or the accusative with παρα para or προς pros understood and should be accusative, but it is placed in the clause after the relative and in the same locative case with the relative ωι hōi (due to παρ par' beside, with). Then the rest agrees in case with Μνασωνι Mnasōni He was originally from Cyprus, but now in Caesarea. The Codex Bezae adds εις τινα κωμην eis tina kōmēn (to a certain village) and makes it mean that they were to lodge with Mnason at his home there about halfway to Jerusalem. This may be true. The use of the subjunctive χενιστωμεν xenisthōmen (first aorist passive of χενιζω xenizō to entertain strangers as in Acts 10:6, Acts 10:23, Acts 10:32 already) may be volitive of purpose with the relative (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 955, 989). The use of αρχαιωι archaiōi for “early” may refer to the fact that he was one of the original disciples at Pentecost as Peter in Acts 15:7 uses ημερων αρχαιων hēmerōn archaiōn (early days) to refer to his experience at Ceasarea in Acts 10. “As the number of the first disciples lessened, the next generation accorded a sort of honour to the survivors” (Furneaux). [source]
A thoroughly idiomatic Greek idiom, incorporation and attraction of the antecedent into the relative clause (Robertson, Grammar, p. 718). Μνασωνι Mnasōni is really the object of αγοντες agontes or the accusative with παρα para or προς pros understood and should be accusative, but it is placed in the clause after the relative and in the same locative case with the relative ωι hōi (due to παρ par' beside, with). Then the rest agrees in case with Μνασωνι Mnasōni He was originally from Cyprus, but now in Caesarea. The Codex Bezae adds εις τινα κωμην eis tina kōmēn (to a certain village) and makes it mean that they were to lodge with Mnason at his home there about halfway to Jerusalem. This may be true. The use of the subjunctive χενιστωμεν xenisthōmen (first aorist passive of χενιζω xenizō to entertain strangers as in Acts 10:6, Acts 10:23, Acts 10:32 already) may be volitive of purpose with the relative (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 955, 989). The use of αρχαιωι archaiōi for “early” may refer to the fact that he was one of the original disciples at Pentecost as Peter in Acts 15:7 uses ημερων αρχαιων hēmerōn archaiōn (early days) to refer to his experience at Ceasarea in Acts 10. “As the number of the first disciples lessened, the next generation accorded a sort of honour to the survivors” (Furneaux). [source]
Another (see προσκυνησων proskunēsōn in Acts 24:11) example of the future participle of purpose in the N.T. These “alms” (on ελεημοσυνας eleēmosunas See Matthew 6:1, Matthew 6:4, and note on Acts 10:2, common in Tobit and is in the papyri) were for the poor saints in Jerusalem (1 Corinthians 16:1-4; 2 Corinthians 8; 2 Corinthians 9:1-15; Romans 15:26) who were none the less Jews. “And offerings” The very word used in Acts 21:26 of the offerings or sacrifices made by Paul for the four brethren and himself. It does not follow that it was Paul‘s original purpose to make these “offerings” before he came to Jerusalem (cf. Acts 18:18). He came up to worship (Acts 24:11) and to be present at Pentecost (Acts 20:16). [source]
This genitive articular infinitive with εκριτη ekrithē like the lxx construction translating the Hebrew infinitive construct is awkward in Greek. Several similar examples in Luke 17:1; Acts 10:25; Acts 20:3 (Robertson, Grammar, p. 1068). Luke alone uses this old verb in N.T. He uses nine compounds of πλεω pleō 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. [source]
Present middle (direct) infinitive of conative action again. Same word κολλαω kollaō in Luke 15:15; Acts 10:28. See note on Matthew 19:5 for discussion. Were all afraid of him (pantes ephobounto auton). They were fearing him. Imperfect middle picturing the state of mind of the disciples who had vivid recollections of his conduct when last here. What memories Saul had on this return journey to Jerusalem after three years. He had left a conquering hero of Pharisaism. He returns distrusted by the disciples and regarded by the Pharisees as a renegade and a turncoat. He made no effort to get in touch with the Sanhedrin who had sent him to Damascus. He had escaped the plots of the Jews in Damascus only to find himself the object of suspicion by the disciples in Jerusalem who had no proof of his sincerity in his alleged conversion. Not believing They had probably heard of his conversion, but they frankly disbelieved the reports and regarded him as a hypocrite or a spy in a new role to ruin them. Was (παντες εποβουντο αυτον estin). The present tense is here retained in indirect discourse according to the common Greek idiom. [source]
Only here in the New Testament. For the kindred verb χρηματίζω warnsee on Matthew 2:12; see on Luke 2:26; see on Acts 10:22. Compare Romans 8:3. The word means an oracular answer. In the New Testament the verb is commonly rendered warn. [source]
Rev., more correctly, therein is revealed a righteousness of God. The absence of the article denotes that a peculiar kind of righteousness is meant. This statement contains the subject of the epistle: Righteousness is by faith. The subject is not stated formally nor independently, but as a proof that the Gospel is a power, etc. This word δικαιοσύνη righteousnessand its kindred words δίκαιος righteousand δικαιόω tomake righteous, play so important a part in this epistle that it is desirable to fix their meaning as accurately as possible. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Classical Usage. In the Greek classics there appears an eternal, divine, unwritten principle of right, dwelling in the human consciousness, shaping both the physical and the moral ordering of the world, and personified as Themis ( Θέμις ). This word is used as a common noun in the phrase θέμις ἐστὶ itis right (fundamentally and eternally), like the Latin fas est. Thus Homer, of Penelope mourning for Ulysses, θέμις ἐστὶ γυναικός itis the sacred obligation of the wife (founded in her natural relation to her husband, ordained of heaven) to mourn (“Odyssey,” 14,130). So Antigone appeals to the unwritten law against the barbarity of refusing burial to her brother.“Nor did I deem thy edicts strong enough,That thou, a mortal man, shouldst overpass The unwritten laws of God that know not change.”Sophocles, “Antigone,” 453-455.See, also, “Odyssey,” 14,91; Aristophanes, “Clouds,” 140; “Antigone,” 880. This divine ordering requires that men should be shown or pointed to that which is according to it - a definite circle of duties and obligations which constitute right ( δίκη ). Thus what is δίκαιος righteousis properly the expression of the eternal Themis. While δίκη and θέμις are not to be distinguished as human and divine, δίκη has a more distinctively human, personal character, and comes into sharper definition. It introduces the distinction between absolute right and power. It imposes the recognition of a moral principle over against an absolutely constraining natural force. The conception of δίκη is strongly moral. Δίκαιος is right; δικαιοσύνη is rightness as characterizing the entire being of man. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- There is a religious background to the pagan conception. In the Homeric poems morality stands in a relation, loose and undeveloped indeed, but none the less real, to religion. This appears in the use of the oath in compacts; in the fear of the wrath of heaven for omission of sacrifices; in regarding refusal of hospitality as an offense against Zeus, the patron of strangers and suppliants. Certain tribes which are fierce and uncivilized are nevertheless described as δίκαιοι righteous“The characteristic stand-point of the Homeric ethics is that the spheres of law, of morals, and of religion are by no means separate, but lie side by side in undeveloped unity.” (Nagelsbach). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In later Greek literature this conception advances, in some instances, far toward the christian ideal; as in the fourth book of Plato's “Laws,” where he asserts that God holds in His hand the beginning, middle, and end of all things; that justice always follows Him, and punishes those who fall short of His laws. Those who would be dear to God must be like Him. Without holiness no man is accepted of God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Nevertheless, however clearly the religious background and sanction of morality may be recognized, it is apparent that the basis of right is found, very largely, in established social usage. The word ethics points first to what is established by custom. While with Mr. Grote we must admit the peculiar emphasis on the individual in the Homeric poems, we cannot help observing a certain influence of social sentiment on morals. While there are cases like the suitors, Paris and Helen, where public opinion imposes no moral check, there are others where the force of public opinion is clearly visible, such as Penelope and Nausicaa. The Homeric view of homicide reveals no relation between moral sentiment and divine enactment. Murder is a breach of social law, a private and civil wrong, entailing no loss of character. Its penalty is a satisfaction to the feelings of friends, or a compensation for lost services. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Later, we find this social aspect of morality even more strongly emphasized. “The city becomes the central and paramount source of obligation. The great, impersonal authority called 'the Laws' stands out separately, both as guide and sanction, distinct from religious duty or private sympathy” (Grote). Socrates is charged with impiety because he does not believe in the gods of the state, and Socrates himself agrees that that man does right who obeys what the citizens have agreed should be done, and who refrains from what they forbid. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The social basis of righteousness also appears in the frequent contrast between δίκη and βία , right and force. A violation of right is that which forces its way over the social sanction. The social conception of δίκαιος is not lost, even when the idea is so apprehended as to border on the christian love of one's neighbor. There is a wrong toward the gods, but every wrong is not in itself such. The inner, personal relation to deity, the absolute and constraining appeal of divine character and law to conscience, the view of duty as one's right, and of personal right as something to be surrendered to the paramount claim of love - all these elements which distinguish the christian conception of righteousness - are thus in sharp contrast with a righteousness dictated by social claims which limit the individual desire or preference, but which leave untouched the tenacity of personal right, and place obligation behind legitimacy. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- It is desirable that the classical usage of these terms should be understood, in order to throw into sharper relief the Biblical usage, according to which God is the absolute and final standard of right, and every wrong is a sin against God (Psalm 51:4). Each man stands in direct and primary relation to the holy God as He is by the law of His own nature. Righteousness is union with God in character. To the Greek mind of the legendary age such a conception is both strange and essentially impossible, since the Greek divinity is only the Greek man exaggerated in his virtues and vices alike. According to the christian ideal, righteousness is character, and the norm of character is likeness to God. This idea includes all the social aspects of right. Love and duty toward God involve love and duty to the neighbor. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Here must be noted a peculiar usage of δίκαιος righteousand δικαιοσύνη righteousnessin the Septuagint. They are at times interchanged with ἐλεημοσύνη mercyand ἔλεος kindnessThe Hebrew chesed kindness, though usually rendered by ἔλεος , is nine times translated by δικαιοσύνη righteousnessand once by δίκαιος righteousThe Hebrew tsedakah usually rendered by δικαιοσύνη , is nine times translated by ἐλεημοσύνη mercyand three times by ἔλεος kindnessCompare the Heb. and Sept. at Deuteronomy 6:25; Deuteronomy 24:13(15); Genesis 19:19; Genesis 24:27. This usage throws light on the reading δικαιοσύνην , Rev., righteousness (kindness? ), instead of ἐλεημοσύνην mercyA.V., alms, Matthew 6:1. Mr. Hatch (“Essays in Biblical Greek”) says that the meaning kindness is so clear in this passage that scribes, who were unaware of its existence, altered the text. He also thinks that this meaning gives a better sense than any other to Matthew 1:19“Joseph, being a kindly ( δίκαιος , A.V., just ) man.”-DIVIDER- 1. In the New Testament δίκαιος is used both of God and of Christ. Of God, 1 John 1:9; John 17:25; Revelation 16:5; Romans 3:26. Of Christ, 1 John 2:1; 1 John 3:7; Acts 3:14; Acts 7:52; Acts 22:14. In these passages the word characterizes God and Christ either in their essential quality or in their action; either as righteous according to the eternal norm of divine holiness (John 17:25; 1 John 3:7; Romans 3:26), or as holiness passes into righteous dealing with men (1 John 1:9). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 2. Δίκαιος is used of men, denoting their normal relation to the will and judgment of God. Hence it means virtuous, upright, pure in life, correct in thinking and feeling. It stands opposed to ἀνομία lawlessness ἁμαρτία sin ἀκαθαρσία impuritya contrast wanting in classical usage, where the conception of sin is vague. See Romans 6:13, Romans 6:16, Romans 6:18, Romans 6:20; Romans 8:10; 2 Corinthians 6:7, 2 Corinthians 6:14; Ephesians 5:9; Ephesians 6:14; Philemon 1:11; James 3:18. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Where δικαιοσύνη righteousnessis joined with ὁσιότης holiness(Luke 1:75; Ephesians 4:24), it denotes right conduct toward men, as holiness denotes piety toward God. It appears in the wider sense of answering to the demands of God in general, Matthew 13:17; Matthew 10:41; Matthew 23:29; Acts 10:22, Acts 10:35; and in the narrower sense of perfectly answering the divine demands, guiltless. So of Christ, Acts 3:14; 1 Peter 3:18; 1 John 2:1. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 3. It is found in the classical sense of it is right, Philemon 1:7, or that which is right, Colossians 4:1. This, however, is included within the Christian conception. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Δικαιοσύνη righteousnessis therefore that which fulfills the claims of δίκη right“It is the state commanded by God and standing the test of His judgment; the character and acts of a man approved of Him, in virtue of which the man corresponds with Him and His will as His ideal and standard” (Cremer). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The medium of this righteousness is faith. Faith is said to be counted or reckoned for righteousness; i.e., righteousness is ascribed to it or recognized in it. Romans 4:3, Romans 4:6, Romans 4:9, Romans 4:22; Galatians 3:6; James 2:23. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In this verse the righteousness revealed in the Gospel is described as a righteousness of God. This does not mean righteousness as an attribute of God, as in Romans 3:5; but righteousness as bestowed on man by God. The state of the justified man is due to God. The righteousness which becomes his is that which God declares to be righteousness and ascribes to him. Righteousness thus expresses the relation of being right into which God puts the man who believes. See further, on justified, Romans 2:13.Is revealed ( ἀποκαλύπτεται )Emphasizing the peculiar sense in which “righteousness” is used here. Righteousness as an attribute of God was revealed before the Gospel. Righteousness in this sense is a matter of special revelation through the Gospel. The present tense describes the Gospel in its continuous proclamation: is being revealed.From faith to faith ( ἐκ πίστεως εἰς πίστιν )Rev., by faith unto faith. According to the A.V. the idea is that of progress in faith itself; either from Old to New Testament faith, or, in the individual, from a lower to a higher degree of faith; and this idea, I think, must be held here, although it is true that it is introduced secondarily, since Paul is dealing principally with the truth that righteousness is by faith. We may rightly say that the revealed righteousness of God is unto faith, in the sense of with a view to produce faith; but we may also say that faith is a progressive principle; that the aim of God's justifying righteousness is life, and that the just lives by his faith (Galatians 2:20), and enters into “more abundant” life with the development of his faith. Compare 2 Corinthians 2:16; 2 Corinthians 3:18; 2 Corinthians 4:17; Romans 6:19; and the phrase, justification of life, Romans 5:18.sa40 [source]
An old word in various senses like χρηματιζω chrēmatizō only here in N.T. See this use of the verb in Matthew 2:12, Matthew 2:22; Luke 2:26; Acts 10:22. [source]
So Paul takes his stand with the “strong” as in 1 Corinthians 8:4., but he is not a libertine. Paul‘s liberty as to food is regulated by his life in the Lord. For this use of κοινος Koinéos not as common to all (Acts 2:44; Acts 4:32), but unhallowed, impure, see note on Mark 7:2, note on Acts 10:14, and note on Acts 10:28. God made all things for their own uses. Save that (ει μη ei mē). The exception lies not in the nature of the food (δι εαυτου di' heautou), but in the man‘s view of it (to him, εκεινωι ekeinōi dative case). [source]
True of the Roman province (Acts 10:10, Acts 10:26; Colossians 1:6; Colossians 2:1; Colossians 4:13, Colossians 4:16). The gospel spread rapidly from Ephesus. [source]
A.V. misses the force of the imperfect, marking Peter's custom. Not only at church feasts, but at ordinary meals, in defiance of the Pharisaic that this prohibition was not binding (Acts 10:28; Acts 11:8, Acts 11:9), and had defended that position in the apostolic conference (Acts 15:7ff.). [source]
Better, from man. Παρὰ fromemphasizes the idea of transmission, and marks the connection between giver and receiver. Comp. 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 4:1; 2 Timothy 3:14; Acts 10:22. In the Gospels and Acts παραλαμβάνειν usually means to take, in the sense of causing to accompany, as Matthew 4:5; Matthew 17:1; Mark 4:36, etc. Scarcely ever in the sense of receive: see Mark 7:4. In Paul only in the sense of receive, and only with παρὰ , with the single exception of 1 Corinthians 11:23( ἀπὸ ). The simple λαμβάνω usually with παρὰ , but with ἀπὸ , 1 John 2:27; 1 John 3:22. [source]
Saints is often explained as angels; but the meaning is the holy and glorified people of God. Οἱ ἅγιοι is uniformly used of these in N.T. and never of angels unless joined with ἄγγελοι. See Luke 9:26; Mark 8:38; Acts 10:22. It is doubtful if οἱ ἅγιοι is used of angels in lxx. Zechariah 14:5, which is confidently cited as an instance, is quoted at the conclusion of the Didache (xvi. 7), clearly with the sense of glorified believers. Ἅγιοι ἄγγελοι appears 12:15; Job href="/desk/?q=job+5:1&sr=1">Job 5:1. Angels has no connection with anything in this Epistle, but glorified believers is closely connected with the matter which was troubling the Thessalonians. See 1 Thessalonians 4:13. This does not exclude the attendance of angels on the Lord's coming (see Mark 8:38; Luke 9:26), but when Paul speaks of such attendance, as 2 Thessalonians 1:7, he says, with the angels ( ἀγγέλων ) of his power. [source]
Lit. draw nigh. To approach as one who confidingly accepts another's proffer. Hence, to assent to. Comp. Acts 10:28; 1 Peter 2:4; Hebrews 4:16; Hebrews 10:22. Often in lxx, and habitually in the literal sense. The figurative sense, 4:15; 6:26. oP. The phrase only here. [source]
The phrase N.T.oThe triad, God, Christ, the angels, only Luke 9:26. It is not necessary to suppose that a class of angels distinguished from the rest is meant. It may refer to all angels, as special objects of divine complacency. Comp. Acts href="/desk/?q=ac+10:22&sr=1">Acts 10:22; Revelation 14:10. [source]
Lit. born witness to or attested, as Acts 6:3; Acts 10:22; Hebrews 11:2. Comp. μαρτυρίαν καλὴν ἔχειν tohave good testimony, 1 Timothy 3:7. [source]
Literally, “thou knowest better (than I),” for he did those things in Ephesus where thou art. Only N.T. example of βελτιον beltion in D text of Acts 10:28. [source]
Rend. continually. The phrase is usually found in connection with matters involving relations to God - worship, sacrifice, etc. See Matthew 18:10; Luke 24:53; Acts 2:25; Acts 10:2; 2 Thessalonians 3:16; Hebrews 13:5. [source]
The elders for the more common the fathers: the saints of the O.T. dispensation, many of whose names are recorded in this chapter. Εμαρτυρηθήσαν , lit. were borne witness to. God bore witness to them in the victory of their faith over all obstacles, and their characters and deeds as men of faith were recorded in Scripture. For this use of ματυρεῖν in the passive, see Acts 6:3; Acts 10:22; Acts 16:12; Romans 3:21; Hebrews 7:8, Hebrews 7:17. Notice that the statement in this verse does not begin the list of examples, which commences with Hebrews 11:4, but is closely attached to the definition in Hebrews 11:1as a comprehensive justification of it. [source]
Ἡγεῖσθαι tocount or deem means a conscious judgment resting on a deliberate weighing of the facts. See Romans 12:10; Philemon 2:3. Here it implies a deliberate, contemptuous rejection of the gifts of the new covenant. The fundamental idea of κοινὸς is shared by all, public. Thus Acts 2:44; Acts 4:32; Titus 1:4; Judges 1:3. Out of this grows the idea of not sacred; not set apart for particular uses by purification, and so (ceremonially) unclean or defiled, as Mark 7:2, Mark 7:5; Acts 10:14, Acts 10:28; Acts 11:8. In these cases it is not implied that the thing is defiled or filthy in itself, but only unclean through the absence of that which would set it apart. Comp. Romans 14:14. Here the word admits of two explanations: (1) that Christ's blood was counted common, having no more sacred character or specific worth than the blood of any ordinary person; (2) that in refusing to regard Christ's blood as that of an atoner and redeemer, it was implied that his blood was unclean as being that of a transgressor. The former seems preferable. There was no specific virtue in Christ's blood as blood; but a peculiar and unique virtue attached to it as the offering of his eternal spirit (Hebrews 9:14), as the blood shed in ratification of a sacred covenant established by God, and as having sanctifying virtue. This view is further justified by the combination of blood and spirit, as sources of sanctification allied in the writer's mind. [source]
Προσκυνεῖν toworship mostly in the Gospels, Acts, and Apocrypha. In Paul only 1 Corinthians 14:25. Very often in lxx. Originally, to kiss the hand to: thence, to do homage to. Not necessarily of an act of religious reverence (see Matthew 9:18; Matthew 20:20), but often in N.T. in that sense. Usually translated worship, whether a religious sense is intended or not: see on Acts 10:25. The quotation is not found in the Hebrew of the O.T., but is cited literally from lxx, Deuteronomy 32:43. It appears substantially in Psalm 96:7. For the writer of Hebrews the lxx was Scripture, and is quoted throughout without regard to its correspondence with the Hebrew. [source]
Present active indicative of λατρευω latreuō for which verb see note on Matthew 4:10. A copy Dative case after λατρευουσιν latreuousin See note on John 13:15 and note on Hebrews 4:11 for this interesting word. Shadow Dative case. Old word for which see note on Matthew 4:16; note on Mark 4:32; and note on Colossians 2:17. See same idea in Hebrews 9:23. For difference between σκια skia and εικων eikōn see Hebrews 10:1. Here “copy and shadow” form a practical hendiadys for “a shadowy outline” (Moffatt). Is warned of God Perfect passive indicative of χρηματιζω chrēmatizō old verb (from χρημα chrēma business) for which see note on Matthew 2:12, note on Matthew 2:22, and note on Luke 2:26. The word “God” is not used, but it is implied as in Acts 10:22; Hebrews 12:25. So in lxx, Josephus, and the papyri. For saith he Argument from God‘s command (Exodus 25:40). See that thou make Common Greek idiom with present active imperative of οραω horaō and the volitive future of ποιεω poieō without ινα hina (asyndeton, Robertson, Grammar, p. 949). The pattern The very word used in Exodus 25:40 and quoted also by Stephen in Acts 7:44. For τυπος tupos see note on John 20:25; note on Romans 6:17, and etc. The tabernacle was to be patterned after the heavenly model. [source]
Only here, and by Peter in Acts 10:28. More literally, unlawful, emphasizing the idolatries as violations of divine law. [source]
To the Christian all “idolatry,” (τεμιτος eidōlonτεμιστος latreia), worship of idols, is “abominable,” not allowed (alpha privative and τεμιζω themitos ατεμιτος themistos the old form, verbal of themizō to make lawful), but particularly those associated with drinking and licentiousness. The only other N.T. example of athemitos is by Peter also (Acts 10:28) and about the Mosaic law. That may be the idea here, for Jews often fell into idolatrous practices (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 274). [source]
No copula in the Greek, probably εστιν estin (is) rather than δυναται dunatai (can). Late and rare verbal adjective from αρκεω arkeō to suffice, in the papyri several times, in N.T. only here and Matthew 6:34; Matthew 10:25, apparently referring to Christ‘s words in Matthew 6:34 (possibly an axiom or proverb).To have wrought (κατειργασται kateirgasthai). Perfect middle infinitive of κατεργαζομαι katergazomai common compound (κατα εργον kataτο βουλημα ergon work) as in 1 Corinthians 5:3.The desire Correct text, not πεπορευμενους thelēma Either means the thing desired, willed. Jews sometimes fell in with the ways of Gentiles (Romans 2:21-24; Romans 3:9-18; Ephesians 2:1-3) as today some Christians copy the ways of the world.And to have walked (πορευομαι peporeumenous). Perfect middle participle of κατειργασται poreuomai in the accusative plural of general reference with the infinitive εν ασελγειαις kateirgasthai Literally, “having walked or gone.”In lasciviousness All these sins are in the locative case with επιτυμιαις en “In unbridled lustful excesses” (2 Peter 2:7; 2 Corinthians 12:21).Lusts (οινοπλυγιαις epithumiais). Cf. 1 Peter 2:11; 1 Peter 4:2.Winebibbings Old compound Old word (from ποτοις keimai to lie down), rioting drinking parties, in N.T. here and Galatians 5:21; Romans 13:13.Carousings Old word for drinking carousal (from ατεμιτοις ειδωλολατριαις pinō to drink), here only in the N.T. In the light of these words it seems strange to find modern Christians justifying their “personal liberty” to drink and carouse, to say nothing of the prohibition law. The Greeks actually carried lust and drunkenness into their religious observances (Aphrodite, for instance).Abominable idolatries (ειδωλον λατρεια athemitois eidōlolatriais). To the Christian all “idolatry,” (τεμιτος eidōlonτεμιστος latreia), worship of idols, is “abominable,” not allowed (alpha privative and τεμιζω themitos ατεμιτος themistos the old form, verbal of themizō to make lawful), but particularly those associated with drinking and licentiousness. The only other N.T. example of athemitos is by Peter also (Acts 10:28) and about the Mosaic law. That may be the idea here, for Jews often fell into idolatrous practices (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 274). [source]
Correct text, not πεπορευμενους thelēma Either means the thing desired, willed. Jews sometimes fell in with the ways of Gentiles (Romans 2:21-24; Romans 3:9-18; Ephesians 2:1-3) as today some Christians copy the ways of the world.And to have walked (πορευομαι peporeumenous). Perfect middle participle of κατειργασται poreuomai in the accusative plural of general reference with the infinitive εν ασελγειαις kateirgasthai Literally, “having walked or gone.”In lasciviousness All these sins are in the locative case with επιτυμιαις en “In unbridled lustful excesses” (2 Peter 2:7; 2 Corinthians 12:21).Lusts (οινοπλυγιαις epithumiais). Cf. 1 Peter 2:11; 1 Peter 4:2.Winebibbings Old compound Old word (from ποτοις keimai to lie down), rioting drinking parties, in N.T. here and Galatians 5:21; Romans 13:13.Carousings Old word for drinking carousal (from ατεμιτοις ειδωλολατριαις pinō to drink), here only in the N.T. In the light of these words it seems strange to find modern Christians justifying their “personal liberty” to drink and carouse, to say nothing of the prohibition law. The Greeks actually carried lust and drunkenness into their religious observances (Aphrodite, for instance).Abominable idolatries (ειδωλον λατρεια athemitois eidōlolatriais). To the Christian all “idolatry,” (τεμιτος eidōlonτεμιστος latreia), worship of idols, is “abominable,” not allowed (alpha privative and τεμιζω themitos ατεμιτος themistos the old form, verbal of themizō to make lawful), but particularly those associated with drinking and licentiousness. The only other N.T. example of athemitos is by Peter also (Acts 10:28) and about the Mosaic law. That may be the idea here, for Jews often fell into idolatrous practices (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 274). [source]
All these sins are in the locative case with επιτυμιαις en “In unbridled lustful excesses” (2 Peter 2:7; 2 Corinthians 12:21).Lusts (οινοπλυγιαις epithumiais). Cf. 1 Peter 2:11; 1 Peter 4:2.Winebibbings Old compound Old word (from ποτοις keimai to lie down), rioting drinking parties, in N.T. here and Galatians 5:21; Romans 13:13.Carousings Old word for drinking carousal (from ατεμιτοις ειδωλολατριαις pinō to drink), here only in the N.T. In the light of these words it seems strange to find modern Christians justifying their “personal liberty” to drink and carouse, to say nothing of the prohibition law. The Greeks actually carried lust and drunkenness into their religious observances (Aphrodite, for instance).Abominable idolatries (ειδωλον λατρεια athemitois eidōlolatriais). To the Christian all “idolatry,” (τεμιτος eidōlonτεμιστος latreia), worship of idols, is “abominable,” not allowed (alpha privative and τεμιζω themitos ατεμιτος themistos the old form, verbal of themizō to make lawful), but particularly those associated with drinking and licentiousness. The only other N.T. example of athemitos is by Peter also (Acts 10:28) and about the Mosaic law. That may be the idea here, for Jews often fell into idolatrous practices (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 274). [source]
Old compound Old word (from ποτοις keimai to lie down), rioting drinking parties, in N.T. here and Galatians 5:21; Romans 13:13.Carousings Old word for drinking carousal (from ατεμιτοις ειδωλολατριαις pinō to drink), here only in the N.T. In the light of these words it seems strange to find modern Christians justifying their “personal liberty” to drink and carouse, to say nothing of the prohibition law. The Greeks actually carried lust and drunkenness into their religious observances (Aphrodite, for instance).Abominable idolatries (ειδωλον λατρεια athemitois eidōlolatriais). To the Christian all “idolatry,” (τεμιτος eidōlonτεμιστος latreia), worship of idols, is “abominable,” not allowed (alpha privative and τεμιζω themitos ατεμιτος themistos the old form, verbal of themizō to make lawful), but particularly those associated with drinking and licentiousness. The only other N.T. example of athemitos is by Peter also (Acts 10:28) and about the Mosaic law. That may be the idea here, for Jews often fell into idolatrous practices (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 274). [source]
Old word for drinking carousal (from ατεμιτοις ειδωλολατριαις pinō to drink), here only in the N.T. In the light of these words it seems strange to find modern Christians justifying their “personal liberty” to drink and carouse, to say nothing of the prohibition law. The Greeks actually carried lust and drunkenness into their religious observances (Aphrodite, for instance).Abominable idolatries (ειδωλον λατρεια athemitois eidōlolatriais). To the Christian all “idolatry,” (τεμιτος eidōlonτεμιστος latreia), worship of idols, is “abominable,” not allowed (alpha privative and τεμιζω themitos ατεμιτος themistos the old form, verbal of themizō to make lawful), but particularly those associated with drinking and licentiousness. The only other N.T. example of athemitos is by Peter also (Acts 10:28) and about the Mosaic law. That may be the idea here, for Jews often fell into idolatrous practices (Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 274). [source]
Present passive indicative of χενιζω xenizō old verb (from χενος xenos stranger), to entertain a guest (Acts 10:23), to astonish (Acts 17:20). See also 1 Peter 4:12. “They are surprised or astonished.”That ye run not with them (μη συντρεχοντων υμων mē suntrechontōn humōn). Genitive absolute (negative μη mē) with present active participle of συντρεχω suntrechō old compound, to run together like a crowd or a mob as here (just like our phrase, “running with certain folks”).Into the same excess of riot Αναχυσιν Anachusin (from αναχεω anacheō to pour forth) is a late and rare word, our overflowing, here only in N.T. Ασωτιας Asōtias is the character of an abandoned man Present active participle of βλασπημεω blasphēmeō as in Luke 22:65. “The Christians were compelled to stand aloof from all the social pleasures of the world, and the Gentiles bitterly resented their puritanism, regarding them as the enemies of all joy, and therefore of the human race” (Bigg). [source]
The same verb as in Luke 1:21, of waiting for Zacharias. Cornelius waited (Acts 10:24); the cripple expecting to receive something (Acts 3:5). [source]
Old anarthrous adjective (from ευ eu and σεβομαι sebomai to worship), in N.T. only here and Acts 10:2, Acts 10:7 (by Peter). For temptation Present active infinitive of τηρεω tēreō after οιδεν oiden (αδικους adikous). As in 1 Peter 3:18.Under punishment Present passive participle of κολαζω kolazō old verb (from κολος kolos lopped off), in N.T. only here and Acts 4:21. Present tense emphasises continuity of the punishment. See κολασιν αιωνιον kolasin aiōnion in Matthew 25:46. [source]
His fellow-Christian. The singular, brother, is characteristic of this Epistle. See 1 John 2:10, 1 John 2:11; 1 John 3:10, 1 John 3:15, 1 John 3:17; 1 John 4:20, 1 John 4:21; 1 John 5:16. Christians are called in the New Testament, Christians (Acts 11:26; Acts 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16), mainly by those outside of the Christian circle. Disciples, applied to all followers of Christ (John 2:11; John 6:61) and strictly to the twelve (John 13:5sqq.). In Acts 19:1, to those who had received only John's baptism. Not found in John's Epistles nor in Revelation. Brethren. The first title given to the body of believers after the Ascension (Acts 1:15, where the true reading is ἀδελφῶν brethrenfor μαθητῶν disciples). See Acts 9:30; Acts 10:23; Acts 11:29; 1 Thessalonians 4:10; 1 Thessalonians 5:26; 1 John 3:14; 3 John 1:5, 3 John 1:10; John 21:23. Peter has ἡ ἀδελφότης thebrotherhood (1 Peter 2:17; 1 Peter 5:9). The believers. Under three forms: The believers ( οἱ πιστοί ; Acts 10:45; 1 Timothy 4:12); they that believe ( οἱ πιστεύοντες ; 1 Peter 2:7; 1 Thessalonians 1:7; Ephesians 1:19); they that believed ( οἱ πιστεύσαντες ; Acts 2:44; Acts 4:32; Hebrews 4:3). The saints ( οἱ ἅγιοι ); characteristic of Paul and Revelation. Four times in the Acts (Acts 9:13, Acts 9:32, Acts 9:41; Acts 26:10), and once in Jude (Judges 1:3). Also Hebrews 6:10; Hebrews 13:24. In Paul, 1 Corinthians 6:1; 1 Corinthians 14:33; Ephesians 1:1, Ephesians 1:15, etc. In Revelation 5:8; Revelation 8:3, Revelation 8:4; Revelation 11:18, etc.|Until now ( ἕως ἄρτι )|Though the light has been increasing, and though he may claim that he has been in the light from the first. The phrase occurs in John 2:10; John 5:17; John 16:24; and is used by Paul, 1 Corinthians 4:13; 1 Corinthians 8:7; 1 Corinthians 15:6.| [source]
This genitive articular infinitive is another grammatical problem in this sentence. If εγενετο egeneto (arose) is repeated as above, then we have the infinitive for purpose, a common enough idiom. Otherwise it is anomalous, not even like Acts 10:25. [source]
The nominative here may be in apposition with πολεμος polemos but it is an abnormal construction with no verb, though εγενετο egeneto (arose) can be understood as repeated. Michael is the champion of the Jewish people (Daniel 10:13, Daniel 10:21; Daniel 12:1) and is called the archangel in Judges 1:9.Going forth to war (του πολεμησαι tou polemēsai). This genitive articular infinitive is another grammatical problem in this sentence. If εγενετο egeneto (arose) is repeated as above, then we have the infinitive for purpose, a common enough idiom. Otherwise it is anomalous, not even like Acts 10:25.With the dragon On the use of μετα meta with πολεμεω polemeō see Revelation 2:16; Revelation 13:4; Revelation 17:14 (nowhere else in N.T.). The devil has angels under his command (Matthew 25:41) and preachers also (2 Corinthians 11:14.).Warred (επολεμησεν epolemēsen). Constative aorist active indicative of πολεμεω polemeō picturing the whole battle in one glimpse. [source]