KJV: And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not;
YLT: And the people are looking forward, and all are reasoning in their hearts concerning John, whether or not he may be the Christ;
Darby: But as the people were in expectation, and all were reasoning in their hearts concerning John whether he might be the Christ,
ASV: And as the people were in expectation, and all men reasoned in their hearts concerning John, whether haply he were the Christ;
| Προσδοκῶντος | Are expecting |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Active, Genitive Masculine Singular Root: προσδοκάω Sense: to expect (whether in thought, in hope, or in fear). |
|
| λαοῦ | people |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Masculine Singular Root: λαός Sense: a people, people group, tribe, nation, all those who are of the same stock and language. |
|
| διαλογιζομένων | wondering |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Middle or Passive, Genitive Masculine Plural Root: διαλογίζομαι Sense: to bring together different reasons, to reckon up the reasons, to reason, revolve in one’s mind, deliberate. |
|
| καρδίαις | hearts |
|
Parse: Noun, Dative Feminine Plural Root: καρδία Sense: the heart. |
|
| αὐτῶν | of them |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Genitive Masculine 3rd Person Plural Root: αὐτός Sense: himself, herself, themselves, itself. |
|
| περὶ | concerning |
|
Parse: Preposition Root: περί Sense: about, concerning, on account of, because of, around, near. |
|
| τοῦ | - |
|
Parse: Article, Genitive Masculine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| Ἰωάννου | John |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Masculine Singular Root: Ἰωάννης Sense: John the Baptist was the son of Zacharias and Elisabeth, the forerunner of Christ. |
|
| μή‿ | whether |
|
Parse: Adverb Root: μή Sense: no, not lest. |
|
| ποτε | ever |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: πότε Sense: when?, at what time?. |
|
| εἴη | might be |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Optative Active, 3rd Person Singular Root: εἰμί Sense: to be, to exist, to happen, to be present. |
|
| Χριστός | Christ |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Χριστός Sense: Christ was the Messiah, the Son of God. |
|
Greek Commentary for Luke 3:15
Genitive absolute of this striking verb already seen in Luke 1:21. [source]
Genitive absolute again. John‘s preaching about the Messiah and the kingdom of God stirred the people deeply and set them to wondering.Whether haply he were the Christ (μηποτε αυτος ειη ο Χριστος mēpote autos eiē ho Christos). Optative ειη eiē in indirect question changed from the indicative in the direct (Robertson, Grammar, p. 1031). John wrought no miracles and was not in David‘s line and yet he moved people so mightily that they began to suspect that he himself (αυτος autos) was the Messiah. The Sanhedrin will one day send a formal committee to ask him this direct question (John 1:19). [source]
Optative ειη eiē in indirect question changed from the indicative in the direct (Robertson, Grammar, p. 1031). John wrought no miracles and was not in David‘s line and yet he moved people so mightily that they began to suspect that he himself (αυτος autos) was the Messiah. The Sanhedrin will one day send a formal committee to ask him this direct question (John 1:19). [source]
Better as Rev., reasoned. Compare Luke 1:29; and see on James 2:4. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Luke 3:15
According to the proper reading, ἐγὼ , I, stands first in the Baptist's statement, the ὅτι having the force merely of quotation marks. It is emphatic: “I am not the Christ, though the Christ is here.” Some were questioning whether John was the Christ (Luke 3:15; Acts 13:25). Note the frequent occurrence of the emphatic I: John 1:23, John 1:26, John 1:27, John 1:30, John 1:31, John 1:33, John 1:34. On the Christ, see on Matthew 1:1. [source]
He had twice already alluded to it (John 1:7. and John 1:15) and now he proceeds to give it as the most important item to add after the Prologue. Just as the author assumes the birth narratives of Matthew and Luke, so he assumes the Synoptic accounts of the baptism of Jesus by John, but adds various details of great interest and value between the baptism and the Galilean ministry, filling out thus our knowledge of this first year of the Lord‘s ministry in various parts of Palestine. The story in John proceeds along the same lines as in the Synoptics. There is increasing unfolding of Christ to the disciples with increasing hostility on the part of the Jews till the final consummation in Jerusalem. When the Jews sent unto him John, writing in Ephesus near the close of the first century long after the destruction of Jerusalem, constantly uses the phrase “the Jews” as descriptive of the people as distinct from the Gentile world and from the followers of Christ (at first Jews also). Often he uses it of the Jewish leaders and rulers in particular who soon took a hostile attitude toward both John and Jesus. Here it is the Jews from Jerusalem who sent Priests and Levites Sadducees these were. Down below in John 1:24 the author explains that it was the Pharisees who sent the Sadducees. The Synoptics throw a flood of light on this circumstance, for in Matthew 3:7 we are told that the Baptist called the Pharisees and Sadducees “offspring of vipers” (Luke 3:7). Popular interest in John grew till people were wondering “in their hearts concerning John whether haply he were the Christ” (Luke 3:15). So the Sanhedrin finally sent a committee to John to get his own view of himself, but the Pharisees saw to it that Sadducees were sent. To ask him Final ινα hina and the first aorist active subjunctive of ερωταω erōtaō old verb to ask a question as here and often in the Koiné to ask for something (John 14:16) like αιτεω aiteō Who art thou? Direct question preserved and note proleptic position of συ su “Thou, who art thou?” The committee from the Sanhedrin put the question sharply up to John to define his claims concerning the Messiah. [source]
But only make sneering comments about him (John 7:16) in spite of his speaking “openly” Negative answer expected by μη ποτε mē pote and yet there is ridicule of the rulers in the form of the question. See a like use of μη ποτε mē pote in Luke 3:15, though nowhere else in John. Εγνωσαν Egnōsan (second aorist ingressive active indicative of γινωσκω ginōskō) may refer to the examination of Jesus by these rulers in John 5:19. and means, “Did they come to know or find out” (and so hold now)? That this is the Christ The Messiah of Jewish hope. [source]
The continued paratactic use of και kai (and) and the first aorist active indicative of ομολογεω homologeō old verb from ομολογος homologos Negative statement of same thing in Johannine fashion, first aorist middle indicative of και ωμολογησεν arneomai another Synoptic and Pauline word (Matthew 10:33; 2 Timothy 2:12). He did not contradict or refuse to say who he was. And he confessed (Εγω ουκ ειμι ο Χριστος kai hōmologēsen). Thoroughly Johannine again in the paratactic repetition. I am not the Christ (οτι Egō ouk eimi ho Christos). Direct quotation again with recitative ο Χριστος hoti before it like our modern quotation marks. “I am not the Messiah,” he means by ho Christos (the Anointed One). Evidently it was not a new question as Luke had already shown (Luke 3:15). [source]
Reference to John 3:22. the work of the Baptist and the jealousy of his disciples. Ουν Oun is very common in John‘s Gospel in such transitions. The Lord So the best manuscripts (Neutral Alexandrian), though the Western class has ο Ιησους ho Iēsous Mark usually has ο Ιησους ho Iēsous and Luke often ο Κυριος ho Kurios In the narrative portion of John we have usually ο Ιησους ho Iēsous but ο Κυριος ho Kurios in five passages (John 4:1; John 6:23; John 11:2; John 20:20; John 21:12). There is no reason why John should not apply ο Κυριος ho Kurios to Jesus in the narrative sections as well as Luke. Bernard argues that these are “explanatory glosses,” not in the first draft of the Gospel. But why? When John wrote his Gospel he certainly held Jesus to be Κυριος Kurios (Lord) as Luke did earlier when he wrote both Gospel and Acts This is hypercriticism. Knew Second aorist active indicative of γινωσκω ginōskō The Pharisees knew this obvious fact. It was easy for Jesus to know the attitude of the Pharisees about it (John 2:24). Already the Pharisees are suspicious of Jesus. How that Declarative οτι hoti (indirect assertion). Was making and baptizing more disciples than John Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John‘s early ministry (Mark 1:5; Matthew 3:5; Luke 3:7, Luke 3:15) in order to see the significance of this statement that Jesus had forged ahead of him in popular favour. Already the Pharisees had turned violently against John who had called them broods of vipers. It is most likely that they drew John out about the marriage of Herod Antipas and got him involved directly with the tetrarch so as to have him cast into prison (Luke 3:19.). Josephus (Ant. XVIII. v. 2) gives a public reason for this act of Herod Antipas, the fear that John would “raise a rebellion,” probably the public reason for his private vengeance as given by Luke. Apparently John was cast into prison, though recently still free (John 3:24), before Jesus left for Galilee. The Pharisees, with John out of the way, turn to Jesus with envy and hate. [source]
Present middle (direct) participle of αντιδιατιτημι antidiatithēmi late double compound (Diodorus, Philo) to place oneself in opposition, here only in N.T. If peradventure God may give (μη ποτε δωιη ο τεος mē pote dōiē ho theos). Here Westcott and Hort read the late form of the second aorist active optative of διδωμι didōmi for the usual δοιη doiē as they do in 2 Timothy 1:18. But there it is a wish for the future and so regular, while here the optative with μη ποτε mē pote in a sort of indirect question is used with a primary tense δει dei (present) and parallel with an undoubted subjunctive ανανηπσωσιν ananēpsōsin while in Luke 3:15 μη ποτε ειε mē pote eie is with a secondary tense. Examples of such an optative do occur in the papyri (Robertson, Grammar, p. 989) so that we cannot go as far as Moulton does and say that we “must” read the subjunctive δωηι dōēi here (Prolegomena, pp. 55, 193). Repentance “Change of mind” (2 Corinthians 7:10; Romans 2:4). Unto the knowledge of the truth (εις επιγνωσιν αλητειας eis epignōsin alētheias). Paul‘s word “full knowledge” (1 Corinthians 1:9). [source]
Here Westcott and Hort read the late form of the second aorist active optative of διδωμι didōmi for the usual δοιη doiē as they do in 2 Timothy 1:18. But there it is a wish for the future and so regular, while here the optative with μη ποτε mē pote in a sort of indirect question is used with a primary tense δει dei (present) and parallel with an undoubted subjunctive ανανηπσωσιν ananēpsōsin while in Luke 3:15 μη ποτε ειε mē pote eie is with a secondary tense. Examples of such an optative do occur in the papyri (Robertson, Grammar, p. 989) so that we cannot go as far as Moulton does and say that we “must” read the subjunctive δωηι dōēi here (Prolegomena, pp. 55, 193). [source]