what David did
Jesus' action Matthew 12:1-7 is highly significant. "What David did" refers to the time of his rejection and persecution by Saul. 1 Samuel 21:6 . Jesus here is not so much the rejected Saviour as the rejected King; hence the reference to David.
Context Summary
Matthew 12:1-14 - The Right Use Of The Sabbath
The Pharisees had introduced a large number of minute and absurd restrictions on Sabbath observance; so our Lord set Himself to recover the day of rest for the use of the people. He never hesitated, therefore, to work miracles of healing on that day, and so set at defiance the Pharisees and their evil amendments. He contended also that all ritual observance must take the secondary place, and that the primary concern must always be the deep and pressing claims of humanity. Thus it was perfectly legitimate for David to eat the showbread.
Even if a sheep should fall into a pit on the Sabbath, it would be lifted out by the most punctilious of ritualists. How absurd and illogical it was to prohibit deliverance to this man with his withered hand! Notice that this man's condition is symbolic of many who pose as good Christians, but do nothing. They have the power, but do not use it and it becomes atrophied. That power can be given back by Jesus. Dare to act and you will find yourself able to act. [source]
Chapter Summary: Matthew 12
1Jesus reproves the blindness of the Pharisees concerning the Sabbath, 3by scripture, 9by reason, 13and by a miracle 22He heals a man possessed that was blind and mute; 24and confronting the absurd charge of casting out demons by Beelzebub, 32he shows that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit shall never be forgiven 36Account shall be made of idle words 38He rebukes the unfaithful, who seek after a sign, 46and shows who is his brother, sister, and mother
Greek Commentary for Matthew 12:3
What David did [τι εποιησεν Δαυειδ] From the necessity of hunger. The first defence made by Christ appeals to the conduct of David (2 Samuel 21:6). David and those with him did “what was not lawful” (ο ουκ εχον ην ho ouk exon ēn) precisely the charge made against the disciples (ο ουκ εχεστιν ho ouk exestin in Matthew 12:2). [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Matthew 12:3
Matthew 12:32The Holy Spirit [τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ ἁγίου] The Spirit - the holy. These words define more clearly the blasphemy against the Spirit, Matthew 12:31. [source]
Matthew 12:35Bringeth forth [ἐκβάλλει] But the translation is feeble. The word means to throw or fling out. The good or evil things come forth out of the treasure of the heart (Matthew 12:34). “Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.” The issues of the heart are thrown out, as if under pressure of the abundance within. [source]
Matthew 1:19Not willing [ἐβουλήθη] These two words, describing the working of Joseph's mind, and evidently intended to express different phases of thought, open the question of their distinctive meanings in the New Testament, where they frequently occur ( θέλω much oftener than βούλομαι ), and where the rendering, in so many eases by the same words, furnishes no clue to the distinction. The original words are often used synonymously in eases where no distinction is emphasized; but their use in other eases reveals a radical and recognized difference. An interchange is inadmissible when the greater force of the expression requires θέλειν . For instance, βαούλεσθαι , would be entirely inappropriate at Matthew 8:3, “I will, be thou cleansed;” or at Romans 7:15. The distinction, which is abundantly illustrated in Homer, is substantially maintained by the classical writers throughout, and in the New Testament. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
Θέλειν is the stronger word, and expresses a purpose or determination or decree, the execution of which is, or is believed to be, in the power of him who wills. Βούλεσθαι expresses wish, inclination, or disposition, whether one desires to do a thing himself or wants some one else to do it. Θέλειν , therefore, denotes the active resolution, the will urging on to action. Βούλεσθαι is to have a mind, to desire, sometimes a little stronger, running into the sense of purpose. Θέλειν indicates the impulse of the will; βούλεσθαι , its tendency. Βούλεσθαι can always be rendered by θέλειν , but θέλειν cannot always be expressed by βούλεσθαι . -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
Thus, Agamemnon says, “I would not ( οὐκ ἔθελον )-DIVIDER-
receive the ransom for the maid (i.e., Irefused to receive), because I greatly desire ( βούλομαι )-DIVIDER-
to have her at home” (Homer, “II.,” 1:112). So Demosthenes: “It is fitting that you should be willing ( ἐθέλειν ) to listen to those who wish ( βουλομένων ) to-DIVIDER-
advise” (“Olynth.,” 1:1). That is to say, It is in your power to determine whether or not you will listen to those who desire to advise you, but whose power to do so depends on your consent. Again: “If the gods will it ( θέλωσι ) and you wish it ( βούλησθε )”-DIVIDER-
(Demosth., “Olynth.,” 2:20). -DIVIDER-
In the New Testament, as observed above, though the words are often interchanged, the same distinction is recognized. Thus, Matthew 2:18, “Rachael would not ( ἤθελε ) be comforted;” obstinately and positively refused. Joseph, having the right and power under the (assumed) circumstances to make Mary a public example, resolved ( θέλων )-DIVIDER-
to spare her this exposure. Then the question arose - What should he do? On this he thought, and, having thought ( ἐνθυμηθέντος )his mind inclined (tendency), he was minded ( ἐβουλήθη )-DIVIDER-
to put her away secretly. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
Some instances of the interchanged use of the two words are the following: Mark 15:15, “Pilate willing ”-DIVIDER-
( βουλόμενος ); compare Luke 23:20, “Pilate willing ”-DIVIDER-
( θέλων ). Acts 27:43, “The centurion willing ”-DIVIDER-
( βουλόμενος ) Matthew 27:17, “Whom will ye that I release” ( θέλετε ); so Matthew 27:21. John 18:39, “Will ye that I release” ( βούλεσθε ); Matthew 14:5, “When he would have put him to death” ( θέλων ). Mark 6:48, “He would have passed by them” ( ἤθελε ); Acts 19:30, “Paul would have entered” ( βουλόμενος ). Acts 18:27, “He was disposed to pass” ( βουλόμενος ). Titus 3:8, “I will that thou affirm” ( βούλομαι ) Mark 6:25, “I will that thou give me” ( θέλω ), etc., etc. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
In the New Testament θέλω occurs in the following senses:1.A decree or determination of the will. (a ) Of God (Matthew 12:7; Romans 9:16,Romans 9:18; Acts 18:21; 1 Corinthians 4:19; 1 Corinthians 12:18; 1 Corinthians 15:38). (b ) Of Christ (Matthew 8:3; John 17:24; John 5:21; John 21:22). (c ) Of men (Acts 25:9). Festus, having the power to gratify the Jews, and determining to do so, says to Paul, who has the right to decide, “Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem?” John 6:67, Others of the disciples had decided to leave Jesus. Christ said to the twelve, “Will ye also go away?” Is that your determination? John 7:17, If any man sets his will, is determined to do God's will. John 8:44, The lusts of your father your will is set to do. Acts 24:6.2. A wish or desire. Very many of the passages, however, which are cited under this head (as by Grimm) may fairly be interpreted as implying something stronger than a wish; notably Mark 14:36, of Christ in Gethsemane. Our Lord would hardly have used what thou wilt in so feeble a sense as that of a desire or wish on God's part. Mark 10:43, “Whosoever will be great,” expresses more than the desire for greatness. It is the purpose of the life. Matthew 27:15, It was given to the Jews to decide what prisoner should be released. Luke 1:62, The name of the infant John was referred to Zacharias' decision. John 17:24, Surely Christ does more than desire that those whom the Father has given him shall be with him. Luke 9:54, It is for Jesus to command fire upon the Samaritan villages if he so wills. (See, also, John 15:7; 1 Corinthians 4:21; Matthew 16:25; Matthew 19:17; John 21:22; Matthew 13:28; Matthew 17:12.) In the sense of wish or desire may fairly be cited 2 Corinthians 11:12; Matthew 12:38; Luke 8:20; Luke 23:8; John 12:21; Galatians 4:20; Matthew 7:12; Mark 10:35.3. A liking (Mark 12:38; Luke 20:46; Matthew 27:43). (See note there.) Βούλομαι occurs in the following senses:1.Inclination or disposition (Acts 18:27; Acts 19:30; Acts 25:22; Acts 28:18; 2" translation="">2 Corinthians 1:15).2.Stronger, with the idea of purpose (1 Timothy 6:9; James 1:18; James 3:4; 1 Corinthians 12:11; Hebrews 6:17).In most, if not all of these cases, we might expect θέλειν ; but in this use of βούλομαι there is an implied emphasis on the element of free choice or self-determination, which imparts to the desire or inclination a decretory force. This element is in the human will by gift and consent. In the divine will it is inherent. At this point the Homeric usage may be compared in its occasional employment of βούλομαι to express determination, but only with reference to the gods, in whom to wish is to will. Thus, “Whether Apollo will ( βου.λεται ) ward off the plague” (“II.,” 1:67). “Apollo willed ( βούλετο ) victory to the Trojans” (“Il.,” 7:21).To make a public example ( δειγματίσαι )The word is kindred to δείκνυμι , to exhibit, display, point out. Here, therefore, to expose Mary to public shame (Wyc., publish her; Tynd., defame her). The word occurs in Colossians 2:15, of the victorious Saviour displaying the vanquished powers of evil as a general displays his trophies or captives in a triumphal procession. “He made a show of them openly.” A compound of the same word ( παραδειγματίζω ) appears in Hebrews 6:6, “They crucify the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. ” [source]
Matthew 11:20Most of his mighty works [αι πλεισται δυναμεις αυτου] Literally, “His very many mighty works” if elative as usual in the papyri (Moulton, Prolegomena, p. 79; Robertson, Grammar, p. 670). But the usual superlative makes sense here as the Canterbury translation has it. This word δυναμις dunamis for miracle presents the notion of power like our dynamite. The word τερας teras is wonder, portent, miraculum (miracle) as in Acts 2:19. It occurs only in the plural and always with σημεια sēmeia The word σημειον sēmeion means sign (Matthew 12:38) and is very common in John‘s Gospel as well as the word εργον ergon (work) as in John 5:36. Other words used are παραδοχον paradoxon our word paradox, strange (Luke 5:26), ενδοχον endoxon glorious (Luke 13:17), ταυμασιον thaumasion wonderful (Matthew 21:15). [source]
Matthew 12:31But the blasphemy against the Spirit [η δε του πνευματος βλασπημια] Objective genitive. This is the unpardonable sin. In Matthew 12:32 we have κατα του πνευματος του αγιου kata tou pneumatos tou hagiou to make it plainer. What is the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? These Pharisees had already committed it. They had attributed the works of the Holy Spirit by whose power Jesus wrought his miracles (Matthew 12:28) to the devil. That sin was without excuse and would not be forgiven in their age or in the coming one (Matthew 12:32). People often ask if they can commit the unpardonable sin. Probably some do who ridicule the manifest work of God‘s Spirit in men‘s lives and attribute the Spirit‘s work to the devil. [source]
Matthew 12:34Ye offspring of vipers [γεννηματα εχιδνων] These same terrible words the Baptist had used to the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to his baptism (Matthew 3:7). But these Pharisees had deliberately made their choice and had taken Satan‘s side. The charge against Jesus of being in league with Satan reveals the evil heart within. The heart “spurts out” (εκβαλλει ekballei) good or evil according to the supply (treasure, τησαυρου thēsaurou) within. Matthew 12:33 is like Matthew 7:17-19. Jesus often repeated his crisp pungent sayings as every teacher does. [source]
Matthew 12:36Every idle word [παν ρημα αργον] An ineffective, useless word A word that does no good and so is pernicious like pernicious anaemia. It is a solemn thought. Jesus who knows our very thoughts (Matthew 12:25) insists that our words reveal our thoughts and form a just basis for the interpretation of character (Matthew 12:37). Here we have judgment by words as in 25:31-46 where Jesus presents judgment by deeds. Both are real tests of actual character. Homer spoke of “winged words” And by the radio our words can be heard all round the earth. Who knows where they stop? [source]
Matthew 16:1A sign from heaven [σημειον εκ του ουρανου] The scribes and Pharisees had already asked for a sign (Matthew 12:38). Now this new combination adds “from heaven.” What did they have in mind? They may not have had any definite idea to embarrass Jesus. The Jewish apocalypses did speak of spectacular displays of power by the Son of Man (the Messiah). The devil had suggested that Jesus let the people see him drop down from the pinnacle of the temple and the people expected the Messiah to come from an unknown source (John 7:27) who would do great signs (John 7:31). Chrysostom (Hom. liii.) suggests stopping the course of the sun, bridling the moon, a clap of thunder. [source]
Matthew 24:30The sign of the Son of Man in heaven [το σημειον του υιου του αντρωπου εν ουρανωι] Many theories have been suggested like the cross in the sky, etc. Bruce sees a reference to Daniel 7:13 “one like the Son of man” and holds that Christ himself is the sign in question (the genitive of apposition). This is certainly possible. It is confirmed by the rest of the verse: “They shall see the Son of man coming.” See Matthew 16:27; Matthew 26:64. The Jews had repeatedly asked for such a sign (Broadus) as in Matthew 12:38; Matthew 16:1; John 2:18. [source]
Matthew 3:7Ye offspring of vipers [γεννηματα εχιδνων] Jesus (Matthew 12:34; Matthew 23:33) will use the same language to the Pharisees. Broods of snakes were often seen by John in the rocks and when a fire broke out they would scurry No doubt the Pharisees and Sadducees winced under the sting of this powerful indictment. [source]
Matthew 16:1Tempting him [πειραζοντες] Their motive was bad.A sign from heaven (σημειον εκ του ουρανου sēmeion ek tou ouranou). The scribes and Pharisees had already asked for a sign (Matthew 12:38). Now this new combination adds “from heaven.” What did they have in mind? They may not have had any definite idea to embarrass Jesus. The Jewish apocalypses did speak of spectacular displays of power by the Son of Man (the Messiah). The devil had suggested that Jesus let the people see him drop down from the pinnacle of the temple and the people expected the Messiah to come from an unknown source (John 7:27) who would do great signs (John 7:31). Chrysostom (Hom. liii.) suggests stopping the course of the sun, bridling the moon, a clap of thunder. [source]
Mark 9:40He that is not against us is with us [hos ouk estin kath' hēmōn huper hēmōn estin)] This profound saying throws a flood of light in every direction. The complement of this logion is that in Matthew 12:30: “He that is not with me is against me.” Both are needed. Some people imagine that they are really for Christ who refuse to take a stand in the open with him and for him. [source]
Mark 8:12There shall no sign be given unto this generation [ει δοτησεται τηι γενεαι ταυτηι σημειον] Matthew 16:4 has simply ου δοτησεται ou dothēsetai plain negative with the future passive indicative. Mark has ει ei instead of ου ou which is technically a conditional clause with the conclusion unexpressed (Robertson, Grammar, p. 1024), really aposiopesis in imitation of the Hebrew use of ιμ im This is the only instance in the N.T. except in quotations from the lxx (Hebrews 3:11; Hebrews 4:3,Hebrews 4:5). It is very common in the lxx. The rabbis were splitting hairs over the miracles of Jesus as having a possible natural explanation (as some critics do today) even if by the power of Beelzebub, and those not of the sky (from heaven) which would be manifested from God. So they put up this fantastic test to Jesus which he deeply resents. Matthew 16:4 adds “but the sign of Jonah” mentioned already by Jesus on a previous occasion (Matthew 12:39-41) at more length and to be mentioned again (Luke 11:32). But the mention of the sign of Jonah was “an absolute refusal of signs in their sense” (Bruce). And when he did rise from the dead on the third day, the Sanhedrin refused to be convinced (see Acts 3 to 5). [source]
Luke 11:29But the sign of Jonah [ει μη το σημειον Ιωνα] Luke does not give here the burial and resurrection of Jesus of which Jonah‘s experience in the big fish was a type (Matthew 12:39), but that is really implied (Plummer argues) by the use here of “shall be given” (δοτησεται dothēsetai) and “shall be” (εσται estai), for the resurrection of Jesus is still future. The preaching of Jesus ought to have been sign enough as in the case of Jonah, but the resurrection will be given. Luke‘s report is much briefer and omits what is in Matthew 12:41. [source]
Luke 12:10But unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Spirit [τωι δε εις το αγιον πνευμα βλασπημησαντι] This unpardonable sin is given by Mark 3:28.; Matthew 12:31. immediately after the charge that Jesus was in league with Beelzebub. Luke here separates it from the same charge made in Judea (Luke 11:15-20). As frequently said, there is no sound reason for saying that Jesus only spoke his memorable sayings once. Luke apparently finds a different environment here. Note the use of εις eis here in the sense of “against.” [source]
Luke 6:39Also a parable [και παραβολην] Plummer thinks that the second half of the sermon begins here as indicated by Luke‘s insertion of “And he spake Jesus repeated these sayings on various occasions as every teacher does his characteristic ideas. So Luke 6:40; Matthew 10:24,Luke 6:45; Matthew 12:34. [source]
Luke 6:45Bringeth forth [προπερει] In a similar saying repeated later. Matthew 12:34. has the verb εκβαλλει ekballei (throws out, casts out), a bolder figure. “When men are natural, heart and mouth act in concert. But otherwise the mouth sometimes professes what the heart does not feel” (Plummer). [source]
John 1:51Son of man [] See on Luke 6:22. Notice the titles successively applied to our Lord in this chapter: the greater Successor of the Baptist, the Lamb of God, the Son of God, the Messiah, the King of Israel. These were all given by others. The title Son of man He applies to Himself. In John's Gospel, as in the Synoptists, this phrase is used only by Christ in speaking of Himself; and elsewhere only in Acts 7:56, where the name is applied to Him by Stephen. It occurs less frequently in John than in the Synoptists, being found in Matthew thirty times, in Mark thirteen, and in John twelve. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
Jesus' use of the term here is explained in two ways. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
I. That He borrows the title from the Old Testament to designate Himself either: (a ) as a prophet, as in Ezekiel 2:1-3; Ezekiel 3:1, etc.; or (b ) as the Messiah, as prefigured in Daniel 7:13. This prophecy of Daniel had obtained such wide currency that the Messiah was called Anani, or the man of the clouds. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
(a.) This is untenable, because in Ezekiel, as everywhere in the Old Testament, the phrase Son of man, or Sons of men, is used to describe man under his human limitations, as weak, fallible, and incompetent by himself to be a divine agent. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
(b.) The allusion to Daniel's prophecy is admitted; but Jesus does not mean to say, “I am the Messiah who is prefigured by Daniel.” A political meaning attached in popular conception to the term Messiah; and it is noticeable throughout John's Gospel that Jesus carefully avoids using that term before the people, but expresses the thing itself by circumlocution, in order to avoid the complication which the popular understanding would have introduced into his work. See John 8:24,John 8:25; John 10:24,John 10:25. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
Moreover, the phrase Son of man was not generally applied to the Messiah. On the contrary, John 5:27and John 12:34show that it was set off against that term. Compare Matthew 16:13,Matthew 16:15. Son of God is the Messianic title, which, with one exception, appears in confessions (John 1:34,John 1:49; John 11:27; John 20:31). -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
In Daniel the reference is exclusively to the final stage of human affairs. The point is the final establishment of the divine kingdom. Moreover, Daniel does not say “the Son of man,” but “one like a Son of man.” Compare Revelation 1:13; Revelation 14:14, where also the article is omitted. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
II. The second, and correct explanation is that the phrase Son of man is the expression of Christ's self-consciousness as being related to humanity as a whole: denoting His real participation in human nature, and designating Himself as the representative man. It thus corresponds with the passage in Daniel, where the earthly kingdoms are represented by beasts, but the divine kingdom by a Son of man. Hence, too, the word ἄνθρωπος is purposely used (see on a man, John 1:30, and compare John 8:40). -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
While the human element was thus emphasized in the phrase, the consciousness of Jesus, as thus expressed, did not exclude His divine nature and claims, but rather regarded these through the medium of His humanity. He showed Himself divine in being thus profoundly human. Hence two aspects of the phrase appear in John, as in the Synoptists. The one regards His earthly life and work, and involves His being despised; His accommodation to the conditions of human life; the partial veiling of His divine nature; the loving character of His mission; His liability to misinterpretation; and His outlook upon a consummation of agony. On the other hand, He is possessed of supreme authority; He is about His Father's work; He reveals glimpses of His divine nature through His humanity; His presence and mission entail serious responsibility upon those to whom He appeals; and He foresees a consummation of glory no less than of agony. See Matthew 8:20; Matthew 11:19; Matthew 12:8,Matthew 12:32; Matthew 13:37; Matthew 16:13; Matthew 20:18; Matthew 26:64; Mark 8:31,Mark 8:38; Mark 14:21; Luke 9:26,Luke 9:58; Luke 12:8; Luke 17:22; Luke 19:10; Luke 22:69. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
The other aspect is related to the future. He has visions of another life of glory and dominion; though present in the flesh, His coming is still future, and will be followed by a judgment which is committed to Him, and by the final glory of His redeemed in His heavenly kingdom. See Matthew 10:23; Matthew 13:40sqq.; Matthew 16:27sqq.; Matthew 19:28; Matthew 24:27,Matthew 24:37,Matthew 24:44; Matthew 25:31sqq.; Mark 13:26; Luke 6:22; Luke 17:24,Luke 17:30; Luke 18:8; Luke 21:27. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
[source]
John 10:12He that is a hireling [ο μιστωτος] Old word from μιστοω misthoō to hire (Matthew 20:1) from μιστος misthos (hire, wages, Luke 10:7), in N.T. only in this passage. Literally, “the hireling and not being a shepherd” Note ουκ ouk with the participle ων ōn to emphasize the certainty that he is not a shepherd in contrast with μη εισερχομενος mē eiserchomenos in John 10:1 (conceived case). See same contrast in 1 Peter 1:8 between ουκ ιδοντες ouk idontes and μη ορωντες mē horōntes The hireling here is not necessarily the thief and robber of John 10:1,John 10:8. He may conceivably be a nominal shepherd (pastor) of the flock who serves only for the money, a sin against which Peter warned the shepherds of the flock “not for shameful gain” (1 Peter 5:2). Whose own Every true shepherd considers the sheep in his care “his own” Vivid dramatic present, active indicative of τεωρεω theōreō a graphic picture. The wolf coming Present middle predicate participle of ερχομαι erchomai Leaveth the sheep, and fleeth Graphic present actives again of απιημι aphiēmi and πευγω pheugō The cowardly hireling cares naught for the sheep, but only for his own skin. The wolf was the chief peril to sheep in Palestine. See Matthew 10:6 where Jesus says: “Behold I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves.” And the wolf snatcheth them and scattereth them Vivid parenthesis in the midst of the picture of the conduct of the hireling. Bold verbs these. For the old verb αρπαζω harpazō see John 6:15; Matthew 11:12, and for σκορπιζω skorpizō late word (Plutarch) for the Attic σκεδαννυμι skedannumi see Matthew 12:30. It occurs in the vision of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 34:5) where because of the careless shepherds “the sheep became meat to all the beasts of the field, and were scattered.” Jesus uses αρπαζω harpazō in John 10:29 where no one is able “to snatch” one out of the Father‘s hand. [source]
John 16:32Cometh [ερχεται] Futuristic present middle indicative of ερχομαι erchomai Yea, is come Explanatory use of και kai and the perfect active indicative as in John 12:23. The long-looked-for hour See John 16:2 for this same use of ινα hina (not οτε hote) with ερχομαι ωρα erchomai hōra Ye shall be scattered First aorist passive subjunctive of σκορπιζω skorpizō used in John 10:12 of sheep scampering from the wolf. Cf. Matthew 12:30; Luke 11:33. To his own “To his own home” as in John 1:11; John 19:27. So Appian VI. 23. Shall leave Second aorist subjunctive of απιημι aphiēmi with ινα hina And yet Clear case of και kai in adversative sense, not just “and.” [source]
John 10:33For a good work we stone thee not [περι καλου εργου ου λιταζομεν] “Concerning a good deed we are not stoning thee.” Flat denial that the healing of the blind man on the Sabbath had led them to this attempt (John 8:59) in spite of the facts. But for blasphemy See Acts 26:7 where περι peri with the genitive is also used with εγκαλουμαι egkaloumai for the charge against Paul. This is the only example in John of the word βλασπημια blasphēmia (cf. Matthew 12:31). And because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God In John 5:18 they stated the charge more accurately: “He called God his own Father, making himself equal with God.” That is, he made himself the Son of God. This he did beyond a doubt. But was it blasphemy? Only if he was not the Son of God. The penalty for blasphemy was death by stoning (Leviticus 24:16; 1 Kings 21:10,1 Kings 21:13). [source]
John 14:26Whom [ο] Grammatical neuter, but “whom” is correct translation. The Father will send the Holy Spirit (John 14:16; Luke 24:49; Acts 2:33), but so will the Son (John 15:26; John 16:7) as Jesus breathes the Holy Spirit upon the disciples (John 20:22). There is no contradiction in this relation of the Persons in the Trinity (the Procession of the Holy Spirit). Here the Holy Spirit (full title as in Mark 3:29; Matthew 12:32; Luke 12:10) is identified with the Paraclete. He Emphatic demonstrative pronoun and masculine like παρακλητος paraklētos Shall teach you all things The Holy Spirit knows “the deep things of God” (1 Corinthians 2:10) and he is our Teacher in the Dispensation of the Holy Spirit of both new truth (John 14:25) and old. Bring to your remembrance Future active indicative of υπομιμνησκω hupomimnēskō old verb to remind, to recall, here only in this Gospel (cf. 3 John 1:10; 2 Timothy 2:14) and with two accusatives (person and thing). After pentecost the disciples will be able better to recall and to understand what Jesus had said (how dull they had been at times) and to be open to new revelations from God (cf. Peter at Joppa and Caesarea). [source]
John 8:44Ye are of your father the devil [υμεις εκ του πατρος του διαβολου] Certainly they can “understand” It was like a bombshell in spite of the preliminary preparation. Your will to do Present active indicative of τελω thelō and present active infinitive, “Ye wish to go on doing.” This same idea Jesus presents in Matthew 13:38 (the sons of the evil one, the devil) and Matthew 23:15 (twofold more a son of Gehenna than you). See also 1 John 3:8 for “of the devil” He even called them “broods of vipers” as Jesus did later (Matthew 12:34). A murderer Old and rare word (Euripides) from αντρωπος anthrōpos man, and κτεινω kteinō to kill. In N.T. only here and 1 John 3:15. The Jews were seeking to kill Jesus and so like their father the devil. Stood not in the truth Since ουκ ouk not ουχ ouch is genuine, the form of the verb is εστεκεν esteken the imperfect of the late present stem στηκω stēkō (Mark 11:25) from the perfect active εστηκα hestēka (intransitive) of ιστημι histēmi to place. No truth in him Inside him or outside (environment). The devil and truth have no contact. When he speaketh a lie Indefinite temporal clause with οταν hotan and the present active subjunctive of λαλεω laleō But note the article το to “Whenever he speaks the lie,” as he is sure to do because it is his nature. Hence “he speaks out of his own” For he is a liar Old word for the agent in a conscious falsehood See 1 John 1:10; Romans 3:4. Common word in John because of the emphasis on αλητεια alētheia (truth). And the father thereof (και ο πατηρ αυτου kai ho patēr autou). Either the father of the lie or of the liar, both of which are true as already shown by Jesus. Autou in the genitive can be either neuter or masculine. Westcott takes it thus, “because he is a liar and his father (the devil) is a liar,” making “one,” not the devil, the subject of “whenever he speaks,” a very doubtful expression. [source]
John 8:44Your will to do [τελετε ποιειν] Present active indicative of τελω thelō and present active infinitive, “Ye wish to go on doing.” This same idea Jesus presents in Matthew 13:38 (the sons of the evil one, the devil) and Matthew 23:15 (twofold more a son of Gehenna than you). See also 1 John 3:8 for “of the devil” He even called them “broods of vipers” as Jesus did later (Matthew 12:34). A murderer Old and rare word (Euripides) from αντρωπος anthrōpos man, and κτεινω kteinō to kill. In N.T. only here and 1 John 3:15. The Jews were seeking to kill Jesus and so like their father the devil. Stood not in the truth Since ουκ ouk not ουχ ouch is genuine, the form of the verb is εστεκεν esteken the imperfect of the late present stem στηκω stēkō (Mark 11:25) from the perfect active εστηκα hestēka (intransitive) of ιστημι histēmi to place. No truth in him Inside him or outside (environment). The devil and truth have no contact. When he speaketh a lie Indefinite temporal clause with οταν hotan and the present active subjunctive of λαλεω laleō But note the article το to “Whenever he speaks the lie,” as he is sure to do because it is his nature. Hence “he speaks out of his own” For he is a liar Old word for the agent in a conscious falsehood See 1 John 1:10; Romans 3:4. Common word in John because of the emphasis on αλητεια alētheia (truth). And the father thereof (και ο πατηρ αυτου kai ho patēr autou). Either the father of the lie or of the liar, both of which are true as already shown by Jesus. Autou in the genitive can be either neuter or masculine. Westcott takes it thus, “because he is a liar and his father (the devil) is a liar,” making “one,” not the devil, the subject of “whenever he speaks,” a very doubtful expression. [source]
John 9:41If ye were blind [ει τυπλοι ητε] Condition of second class with imperfect indicative in the protasis. The old word τυπλος tuphlos is from τυπω tuphō to raise a smoke, to blind by smoke (literally and metaphorically). Here, of course, it is moral blindness. If the Pharisees were born morally blind, they would, like idiots, be without responsibility. Ye would not have sin Regular form for conclusion of second-class condition, αν an with imperfect. But now ye say In contrast to the previous condition. See like contrast in John 15:22,John 15:24. They arrogantly asserted superior knowledge. We see The ignorant mob do not (John 7:49). It is sin against light and is hopeless (Mark 3:29; Matthew 12:31.). “Ye are witnesses against yourselves” (μαρτυρειτε εαυτοις martureite heautois Matthew 23:31). [source]
Acts 28:3A bundle of sticks [πρυγανων τι πλητος] “Some multitude (or pile) of dry twigs” Laid (επιτεντος epithentos). So genitive absolute again with second aorist active participle of επιτιτημι epitithēmi to place upon. Few things show Paul to better advantage than this incident. By reason of the heat Old word, only here in N.T. Ablative case with απο apo (from the heat). The viper was in a state of torpor in the bundle of sticks. The heat wakened him. A viper (εχιδνα echidna). The old word used by the Baptist of the Pharisees (Matthew 3:7; Luke 3:7) and by Jesus also (Matthew 12:34; Matthew 23:33). It is objected that there is little wood in the island today and no vipers, though Lewin as late as 1853 believes that he saw a viper near St. Paul‘s Bay. But the island now has 1, 200 people to the square mile and snakes of any kind have a poor chance. The viper has also disappeared from Arran as the island became more frequented (Knowling). Ramsay thinks that the small constrictor (Coronella Austriaca) which still exists in the island may be the “viper,” though it has no poison fangs, but clings and bites. The natives thought that it was a poisonous viper. Fastened on his hand First aorist active indicative of καταπτω kathaptō to fasten down on with the genitive case. Old verb, here only in N.T. Cf. Mark 16:18. [source]
Acts 28:3A viper [εχιδνα] The old word used by the Baptist of the Pharisees (Matthew 3:7; Luke 3:7) and by Jesus also (Matthew 12:34; Matthew 23:33). It is objected that there is little wood in the island today and no vipers, though Lewin as late as 1853 believes that he saw a viper near St. Paul‘s Bay. But the island now has 1, 200 people to the square mile and snakes of any kind have a poor chance. The viper has also disappeared from Arran as the island became more frequented (Knowling). Ramsay thinks that the small constrictor (Coronella Austriaca) which still exists in the island may be the “viper,” though it has no poison fangs, but clings and bites. The natives thought that it was a poisonous viper. [source]
Acts 8:22If perhaps [ει αρα] Si forte. This idiom, though with the future indicative and so a condition of the first class (determined as fulfilled), yet minimizes the chance of forgiveness as in Mark 11:13. Peter may have thought that his sin was close to the unpardonable sin (Matthew 12:31), but he does not close the door of hope. The thought (η επινοια hē epinoia). Old Greek word from επινοεω epinoeō to think upon, and so purpose. Only here in the N.T. [source]
Acts 28:3By reason of the heat [απο της τερμης] Old word, only here in N.T. Ablative case with απο apo (from the heat). The viper was in a state of torpor in the bundle of sticks. The heat wakened him. A viper (εχιδνα echidna). The old word used by the Baptist of the Pharisees (Matthew 3:7; Luke 3:7) and by Jesus also (Matthew 12:34; Matthew 23:33). It is objected that there is little wood in the island today and no vipers, though Lewin as late as 1853 believes that he saw a viper near St. Paul‘s Bay. But the island now has 1, 200 people to the square mile and snakes of any kind have a poor chance. The viper has also disappeared from Arran as the island became more frequented (Knowling). Ramsay thinks that the small constrictor (Coronella Austriaca) which still exists in the island may be the “viper,” though it has no poison fangs, but clings and bites. The natives thought that it was a poisonous viper. Fastened on his hand First aorist active indicative of καταπτω kathaptō to fasten down on with the genitive case. Old verb, here only in N.T. Cf. Mark 16:18. [source]
Acts 6:11Blasphemous words against Moses and God [βλασπημα εις Μωυσην και τον τεον] The punishment for blasphemy was stoning to death. See note on Matthew 12:31 for discussion of the word βλασπημια βλασπημεω βλασπημος blasphēmiaβλαπτω blasphēmeōπημη blasphēmos all in the N.T. from βλαχ blaptō to harm, and πημη phēmē speech, harmful speech, or blax stupid, and phēmē But the charge against Stephen was untrue. Please note that Moses is here placed before God and practically on a par with God in the matter of blasphemy. The purpose of this charge is to stir the prejudices of the people in the matter of Jewish rights and privileges. It is the Pharisees who are conducting this attack on Stephen while the Sadducees had led them against Peter and John. The position of Stephen is critical in the extreme for the Sadducees will not help him as Gamaliel did the apostles. [source]
Romans 7:3She shall be called [χρηματισει] Future active indicative of χρηματιζω chrēmatizō old verb, to receive a name as in Acts 11:26, from χρημα chrēma business, from χραομαι chraomai to use, then to give an oracle, etc. An adulteress (μοιχαλις moichalis). Late word, in Plutarch, lxx. See note on Matthew 12:39. If she be joined Third class condition, “if she come to.” So that she is no adulteress (tou mē einai autēn moichalida). It is a fact that εαν γενηται tou and the infinitive is used for result as we saw in Romans 1:24. Conceived result may explain the idiom here. [source]
1 Corinthians 1:22Require [αἰτοῦσιν] Rev., ask. But it is questionable whether the A.V. is not preferable. The word sometimes takes the sense of demand, as Luke 12:48; 1 Peter 3:15; and this sense accords well with the haughty attitude of the Jews, demanding of all apostolic religions their proofs and credentials. See Matthew 12:38; Matthew 16:1; John 6:30. [source]
1 Corinthians 1:22Ask for signs [σημεια αιτουσιν] The Jews often came to Jesus asking for signs (Matthew 12:38; Matthew 16:1; John 6:30). Seek after wisdom (σοπιαν ζητουσιν sophian zētousin). “The Jews claimed to possess the truth: the Greeks were seekers, speculators ” (Vincent) as in Acts 17:23. [source]
2 Corinthians 6:11Our heart is enlarged [η καρδια ημων πεπλατυνται] Perfect passive indicative of old verb πλατυνω platunō to broaden, from πλατυς platus broad. In N T. only here and Matthew 23:5 (cf. phylacteries). Hence his freedom of speech for “out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (Matthew 12:34). [source]
2 Corinthians 9:9He hath scattered abroad [εσκορπισεν] First aorist active indicative of σκορπιζω skorpizō to scatter, Koiné{[28928]}š verb for σκεδαννυμι skedannumi of the Attic. Probably akin to σκορπιος skorpios (scorpion) from root σκαρπ skarp to cut asunder. See note on Matthew 12:30. It is like sowing seed. To the poor (tois penēsin). Old word from penamai to work for one‘s living. Latin penuria and Greek τοις πενησιν peinaō to be hungry, are kin to it. Only N.T. instance and to be distinguished from πεναμαι ptōchos beggar, abjectly poor. [source]
2 Thessalonians 1:9Glory of his power [δόξης τῆς ἰσχύος αὐτοῦ] For glory see on 1 Thessalonians 2:12. Ἱσχὺς powernot often in Paul. It is indwelling power put forth or embodied, either aggressively or as an obstacle to resistance: physical power organized or working under individual direction. An army and a fortress are both ἰσχυρὸς. The power inhering in the magistrate, which is put forth in laws or judicial decisions, is ἰσχὺς , and makes the edicts ἰσχυρὰ validand hard to resist. Δύναμις is the indwelling power which comes to manifestation in ἰσχὺς The precise phrase used here does not appear elsewhere in N.T. In lxx, Isaiah 2:10,Isaiah 2:19,Isaiah 2:21. The power ( δύναμις ) and glory of God are associated in Matthew 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; Revelation 4:11; Revelation 19:1. Comp. κράτος τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ strengthof his glory, Colossians 1:11. Additional Note on ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον eternaldestruction, 2 Thessalonians 1:9 Ἁιών transliterated eon is a period of time of longer or shorter duration, having a beginning and an end, and complete in itself. Aristotle ( περὶ οὐρανοῦ , i. 9,15) says: “The period which includes the whole time of each one's life is called the eon of each one.” Hence it often means the life of a man, as in Homer, where one's life ( αἰών ) is said to leave him or to consume away (Il. v. 685; Od. v. 160). It is not, however, limited to human life; it signifies any period in the course of events, as the period or age before Christ; the period of the millennium; the mytho-logical period before the beginnings of history. The word has not “a stationary and mechanical value” (De Quincey). It does not mean a period of a fixed length for all cases. There are as many eons as entities, the respective durations of which are fixed by the normal conditions of the several entities. There is one eon of a human life, another of the life of a nation, another of a crow's life, another of an oak's life. The length of the eon depends on the subject to which it is attached. It is sometimes translated world; world representing a period or a series of periods of time. See Matthew 12:32; Matthew 13:40,Matthew 13:49; Luke 1:70; 1 Corinthians 1:20; 1 Corinthians 2:6; Ephesians 1:21. Similarly οἱ αἰῶνες theworlds, the universe, the aggregate of the ages or periods, and their contents which are included in the duration of the world. 1 Corinthians 2:7; 1 Corinthians 10:11; Hebrews 1:2; Hebrews 9:26; Hebrews 11:3. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
The word always carries the notion of time, and not of eternity. It always means a period of time. Otherwise it would be impossible to account for the plural, or for such qualifying expressions as this age, or the age to come. It does not mean something endless or everlasting. To deduce that meaning from its relation to ἀεί is absurd; for, apart from the fact that the meaning of a word is not definitely fixed by its derivation, ἀεί does not signify endless duration. When the writer of the Pastoral Epistles quotes the saying that the Cretans are always ( ἀεί ) liars (Titus 1:12), he surely does not mean that the Cretans will go on lying to all eternity. See also Acts 7:51; 2 Corinthians 4:11; 2 Corinthians 6:10; Hebrews 3:10; 1 Peter 3:15. Ἁεί means habitually or continually within the limit of the subject's life. In our colloquial dialect everlastingly is used in the same way. “The boy is everlastingly tormenting me to buy him a drum.”-DIVIDER-
In the New Testament the history of the world is conceived as developed through a succession of eons. A series of such eons precedes the introduction of a new series inaugurated by the Christian dispensation, and the end of the world and the second coming of Christ are to mark the beginning of another series. See Ephesians 3:11. Paul contemplates eons before and after the Christian era. Ephesians 1:21; Ephesians 2:7; Ephesians 3:9,Ephesians 3:21; 1 Corinthians 10:11; comp. Hebrews 9:26. He includes the series of eons in one great eon, ὁ αἰὼν τῶν αἰώνων theeon of the eons (Ephesians 3:21); and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews describes the throne of God as enduring unto the eon of the eons (Hebrews 1:8). The plural is also used, eons of the eons, signifying all the successive periods which make up the sum total of the ages collectively. Romans 16:27; Galatians 1:5; Philemon 4:20, etc. This plural phrase is applied by Paul to God only. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
The adjective αἰώνιος in like manner carries the idea of time. Neither the noun nor the adjective, in themselves, carry the sense of endless or everlasting. They may acquire that sense by their connotation, as, on the other hand, ἀΐ̀διος , which means everlasting, has its meaning limited to a given point of time in Judges 1:6. Ἁιώνιος means enduring through or pertaining to a period of time. Both the noun and the adjective are applied to limited periods. Thus the phrase εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα , habitually rendered forever, is often used of duration which is limited in the very nature of the case. See, for a few out of many instances, lxx, Exodus 21:6; Exodus 29:9; Exodus 32:13; Joshua 14:9; 1 Samuel 8:13; Leviticus 25:46; Deuteronomy 15:17; 1 Chronicles 28:4. See also Matthew 21:19; John 13:8; 1 Corinthians 8:13. The same is true of αἰώνιος . Out of 150 instances in lxx, four-fifths imply limited duration. For a few instances see Genesis 48:4; Numbers 10:8; Numbers 15:15; Proverbs 22:28; Jonah 2:6; Habakkuk 3:6; Isaiah 61:8. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
Words which are habitually applied to things temporal or material can not carry in themselves the sense of endlessness. Even when applied to God, we are not forced to render αἰώνιος everlastingOf course the life of God is endless; but the question is whether, in describing God as αἰώνιος , it was intended to describe the duration of his being, or whether some different and larger idea was not contemplated. That God lives longer than men, and lives on everlastingly, and has lived everlastingly, are, no doubt, great and significant facts; yet they are not the dominant or the most impressive facts in God's relations to time. God's eternity does not stand merely or chiefly for a scale of length. It is not primarily a mathematical but a moral fact. The relations of God to time include and imply far more than the bare fact of endless continuance. They carry with them the fact that God transcends time; works on different principles and on a vaster scale than the wisdom of time provides; oversteps the conditions and the motives of time; marshals the successive eons from a point outside of time, on lines which run out into his own measureless cycles, and for sublime moral ends which the creature of threescore and ten years cannot grasp and does not even suspect. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
There is a word for everlasting if that idea is demanded. That αἰώνιος occurs rarely in the New Testament and in lxx does not prove that its place was taken by αἰώνιος . It rather goes to show that less importance was attached to the bare idea of everlastingness than later theological thought has given it. Paul uses the word once, in Romans 1:20, where he speaks of “the everlasting power and divinity of God.” In Romans 16:26he speaks of the eternal God ( τοῦ αἰωνίου θεοῦ ); but that he does not mean the everlasting God is perfectly clear from the context. He has said that “the mystery” has been kept in silence in times eternal ( χρόνοις αἰωνίοις ), by which he does not mean everlasting times, but the successive eons which elapsed before Christ was proclaimed. God therefore is described as the God of the eons, the God who pervaded and controlled those periods before the incarnation. To the same effect is the title ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν αἰώνων theKing of the eons, applied to God in 1 Timothy 1:17; Revelation 15:3; comp. 2Timothy href="/desk/?q=2ti+1:9&sr=1">2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2), cannot mean before everlasting times. To say that God bestowed grace on men, or promised them eternal life before endless times, would be absurd. The meaning is of old, as Luke 1:70. The grace and the promise were given in time, but far back in the ages, before the times of reckoning the eons. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
Ζωὴ αἰώνιος eternallife, which occurs 42 times in N.T., but not in lxx, is not endless life, but life pertaining to a certain age or eon, or continuing during that eon. I repeat, life may be endless. The life in union with Christ is endless, but the fact is not expressed by αἰώνιος . Κόλασις αἰώνιος , rendered everlasting punishment (Matthew 25:46), is the punishment peculiar to an eon other than that in which Christ is speaking. In some cases ζωὴ αἰώνιος does not refer specifically to the life beyond time, but rather to the eon or dispensation of Messiah which succeeds the legal dispensation. See Matthew 19:16; John 5:39. John says that ζωὴ αἰώνιος is the present possession of those who believe on the Son of God, John 3:36; John 5:24; John 6:47,John 6:64. The Father's commandment is ζωὴ αἰώσιος , John 12:50; to know the only true God and Jesus Christ is ζωὴ αἰώνιος , John 17:3. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
Bishop Westcott very justly says, commenting upon the terms used by John to describe life under different aspects: “In considering these phrases it is necessary to premise that in spiritual things we must guard against all conclusions which rest upon the notions of succession and duration. 'Eternal life' is that which St. Paul speaks of as ἡ ὄντως ζωὴ thelife which is life indeed, and ἡ ζωὴ τοῦ θεοῦ thelife of God. It is not an endless duration of being in time, but being of which time is not a measure. We have indeed no powers to grasp the idea except through forms and images of sense. These must be used, but we must not transfer them as realities to another order.”-DIVIDER-
Thus, while αἰώνιος carries the idea of time, though not of endlessness, there belongs to it also, more or less, a sense of quality. Its character is ethical rather than mathematical. The deepest significance of the life beyond time lies, not in endlessness, but in the moral quality of the eon into which the life passes. It is comparatively unimportant whether or not the rich fool, when his soul was required of him (Luke 12:20), entered upon a state that was endless. The principal, the tremendous fact, as Christ unmistakably puts it, was that, in the new eon, the motives, the aims, the conditions, the successes and awards of time counted for nothing. In time, his barns and their contents were everything; the soul was nothing. In the new life the soul was first and everything, and the barns and storehouses nothing. The bliss of the sanctified does not consist primarily in its endlessness, but in the nobler moral conditions of the new eon, - the years of the holy and eternal God. Duration is a secondary idea. When it enters it enters as an accompaniment and outgrowth of moral conditions. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
In the present passage it is urged that ὄλεθρον destructionpoints to an unchangeable, irremediable, and endless condition. If this be true, if ὄλεθρος isextinction, then the passage teaches the annihilation of the wicked, in which case the adjective αἰώνιος is superfluous, since extinction is final, and excludes the idea of duration. But ὄλεθρος does not always mean destruction or extinction. Take the kindred verb ἀπόλλυμι todestroy, put an end to, or in the middle voice, to be lost, to perish. Peter says, “the world being deluged with water, perished ” ( ἀπολοῦνται 2 Peter 3:6); but the world did not become extinct, it was renewed. In Hebrews 1:11,Hebrews 1:12quoted from Isaiah href="/desk/?q=isa+51:6&sr=1">Isaiah 51:6,Isaiah 51:16; Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; 2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1. Similarly, “the Son of man came to save that which was lost ” ( ἀπολωλός ), Luke 19:10. Jesus charged his apostles to go to the lost ( ἀπολωλότα ) sheep of the house of Israel, Matthew 10:6, comp. Matthew 15:24. “He that shall lose ( ἀπολέσῃ ) his life for my sake shall find it,” Matthew 16:25. Comp. Luke 15:6,Luke 15:9,Luke 15:32. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
In this passage the word destruction is qualified. It is “destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power, “ at his second coming, in the new eon. In other words, it is the severance, at a given point of time, of those who obey not the gospel from the presence and the glory of Christ. Ἁιώνιος may therefore describe this severance as continuing during the millennial eon between Christ's coming and the final judgment; as being for the wicked prolonged throughout that eon and characteristic of it, or it may describe the severance as characterizing or enduring through a period or eon succeeding the final judgment, the extent of which period is not defined. In neither case is αἰώνιος to be interpreted as everlasting or endless.sa180 [source]
Hebrews 13:17Obey [πειτεστε] Present middle imperative of πειτω peithō with dative case. Submit Present active imperative of υπεικω hupeikō old compound to yield under, to give up. Here only in N.T. They watch Present active indicative of αγρυπνεω agrupneō old verb (from αγρεω agreō to search, υπνος hupnos sleep), to seek after sleep, to be sleepless, be watchful (Mark 13:33). As they that shall give account Regular Greek idiom with ως hōs and the future participle. For λογον αποδιδωμι logon apodidōmi to render account, see Matthew 12:36. These leaders as good shepherds recognize keenly their responsibility for the welfare of the flock. And not with grief “And not groaning” (cf. Romans 8:23). Unprofitable Old double compound adjective (alpha privative and λυσιτελης lusitelēs and this from λυω luō to pay, and τελος telos tax, useful or profitable as Luke 17:2), not profitable, not advantageous, by litotes, hurtful, pernicious. Common rhetorical litotes, here only in N.T. [source]
James 4:4Adulteresses [μοιχαλίδες] The feminine term is the general designation of all whom James here rebukes. The apostate members of the church are figuratively regarded as unfaithful spouses; according to the common Old-Testament figure, in which God is the bridegroom or husband to whom his people are wedded. See Hosea 2, Hosea href="/desk/?q=ho+3:1-5&sr=1">Hosea 3:1-5, 4; Isaiah 54:5; Isaiah 62:4,Isaiah 62:5. Also, Matthew 12:39; 2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation 19:7; Revelation 21:9. [source]
James 2:20O vain man [ω αντρωπε κενε] Goes on with the singular objector and demolishes him. For “empty” (deficient) Paul uses απρων aphrōn (fool) in 1 Corinthians 15:36 and just αντρωπε anthrōpe in Romans 2:1; Romans 9:20.Barren (αργε arge). See 2 Peter 1:8 (not idle nor unfruitful) and Matthew 12:36, but Hort urges “inactive” as the idea here, like money with no interest and land with no crops. [source]
James 2:20Barren [αργε] See 2 Peter 1:8 (not idle nor unfruitful) and Matthew 12:36, but Hort urges “inactive” as the idea here, like money with no interest and land with no crops. [source]
1 John 5:16Sinning a sin [αμαρτανοντα αμαρτιαν] Present active predicate (supplementary) participle agreeing with αδελπον adelphon and with cognate accusative αμαρτιαν hamartian unto death Repeated again with αμαρτανουσιν hamartanousin and in contrast with αμαρτια προς τανατον hamartia pros thanaton (sin unto death). Most sins are not mortal sins, but clearly John conceives of a sin that is deadly enough to be called “unto death.” This distinction is common in the rabbinic writings and in Numbers 18:22 the lxx has λαβειν αμαρτιαν τανατηπορον labein hamartian thanatēphoron “to incur a death-bearing sin” as many crimes then and now bear the death penalty. There is a distinction in Hebrews 10:26 between sinning wilfully after full knowledge and sins of ignorance (Hebrews 5:2). Jesus spoke of the unpardonable sin (Mark 3:29; Matthew 12:32; Luke 12:10), which was attributing to the devil the manifest work of the Holy Spirit. It is possible that John has this idea in mind when he applies it to those who reject Jesus Christ as God‘s Son and set themselves up as antichrists.Concerning this (περι εκεινης peri ekeinēs). This sin unto death.That he should make request Sub-final use of ινα hina with the first aorist active subjunctive of ερωταω erōtaō used here as in John 17:15,John 17:20 (and often) for request rather than for question. John does not forbid praying for such cases; he simply does not command prayer for them. He leaves them to God. [source]
What do the individual words in Matthew 12:3 mean?
-AndHe saidto themNotyou have readwhatdidDavidwhenhe was hungryandthosewithhim
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Active, 2nd Person Plural
Root: ἀναγινώσκω
Sense: to distinguish between, to recognise, to know accurately, to acknowledge.
Greek Commentary for Matthew 12:3
From the necessity of hunger. The first defence made by Christ appeals to the conduct of David (2 Samuel 21:6). David and those with him did “what was not lawful” (ο ουκ εχον ην ho ouk exon ēn) precisely the charge made against the disciples (ο ουκ εχεστιν ho ouk exestin in Matthew 12:2). [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Matthew 12:3
The Spirit - the holy. These words define more clearly the blasphemy against the Spirit, Matthew 12:31. [source]
But the translation is feeble. The word means to throw or fling out. The good or evil things come forth out of the treasure of the heart (Matthew 12:34). “Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.” The issues of the heart are thrown out, as if under pressure of the abundance within. [source]
These two words, describing the working of Joseph's mind, and evidently intended to express different phases of thought, open the question of their distinctive meanings in the New Testament, where they frequently occur ( θέλω much oftener than βούλομαι ), and where the rendering, in so many eases by the same words, furnishes no clue to the distinction. The original words are often used synonymously in eases where no distinction is emphasized; but their use in other eases reveals a radical and recognized difference. An interchange is inadmissible when the greater force of the expression requires θέλειν . For instance, βαούλεσθαι , would be entirely inappropriate at Matthew 8:3, “I will, be thou cleansed;” or at Romans 7:15. The distinction, which is abundantly illustrated in Homer, is substantially maintained by the classical writers throughout, and in the New Testament. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Θέλειν is the stronger word, and expresses a purpose or determination or decree, the execution of which is, or is believed to be, in the power of him who wills. Βούλεσθαι expresses wish, inclination, or disposition, whether one desires to do a thing himself or wants some one else to do it. Θέλειν , therefore, denotes the active resolution, the will urging on to action. Βούλεσθαι is to have a mind, to desire, sometimes a little stronger, running into the sense of purpose. Θέλειν indicates the impulse of the will; βούλεσθαι , its tendency. Βούλεσθαι can always be rendered by θέλειν , but θέλειν cannot always be expressed by βούλεσθαι . -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Thus, Agamemnon says, “I would not ( οὐκ ἔθελον )-DIVIDER- receive the ransom for the maid (i.e., Irefused to receive), because I greatly desire ( βούλομαι )-DIVIDER- to have her at home” (Homer, “II.,” 1:112). So Demosthenes: “It is fitting that you should be willing ( ἐθέλειν ) to listen to those who wish ( βουλομένων ) to-DIVIDER- advise” (“Olynth.,” 1:1). That is to say, It is in your power to determine whether or not you will listen to those who desire to advise you, but whose power to do so depends on your consent. Again: “If the gods will it ( θέλωσι ) and you wish it ( βούλησθε )”-DIVIDER- (Demosth., “Olynth.,” 2:20). -DIVIDER- In the New Testament, as observed above, though the words are often interchanged, the same distinction is recognized. Thus, Matthew 2:18, “Rachael would not ( ἤθελε ) be comforted;” obstinately and positively refused. Joseph, having the right and power under the (assumed) circumstances to make Mary a public example, resolved ( θέλων )-DIVIDER- to spare her this exposure. Then the question arose - What should he do? On this he thought, and, having thought ( ἐνθυμηθέντος )his mind inclined (tendency), he was minded ( ἐβουλήθη )-DIVIDER- to put her away secretly. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Some instances of the interchanged use of the two words are the following: Mark 15:15, “Pilate willing ”-DIVIDER- ( βουλόμενος ); compare Luke 23:20, “Pilate willing ”-DIVIDER- ( θέλων ). Acts 27:43, “The centurion willing ”-DIVIDER- ( βουλόμενος ) Matthew 27:17, “Whom will ye that I release” ( θέλετε ); so Matthew 27:21. John 18:39, “Will ye that I release” ( βούλεσθε ); Matthew 14:5, “When he would have put him to death” ( θέλων ). Mark 6:48, “He would have passed by them” ( ἤθελε ); Acts 19:30, “Paul would have entered” ( βουλόμενος ). Acts 18:27, “He was disposed to pass” ( βουλόμενος ). Titus 3:8, “I will that thou affirm” ( βούλομαι ) Mark 6:25, “I will that thou give me” ( θέλω ), etc., etc. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In the New Testament θέλω occurs in the following senses:1.A decree or determination of the will. (a ) Of God (Matthew 12:7; Romans 9:16, Romans 9:18; Acts 18:21; 1 Corinthians 4:19; 1 Corinthians 12:18; 1 Corinthians 15:38). (b ) Of Christ (Matthew 8:3; John 17:24; John 5:21; John 21:22). (c ) Of men (Acts 25:9). Festus, having the power to gratify the Jews, and determining to do so, says to Paul, who has the right to decide, “Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem?” John 6:67, Others of the disciples had decided to leave Jesus. Christ said to the twelve, “Will ye also go away?” Is that your determination? John 7:17, If any man sets his will, is determined to do God's will. John 8:44, The lusts of your father your will is set to do. Acts 24:6.2. A wish or desire. Very many of the passages, however, which are cited under this head (as by Grimm) may fairly be interpreted as implying something stronger than a wish; notably Mark 14:36, of Christ in Gethsemane. Our Lord would hardly have used what thou wilt in so feeble a sense as that of a desire or wish on God's part. Mark 10:43, “Whosoever will be great,” expresses more than the desire for greatness. It is the purpose of the life. Matthew 27:15, It was given to the Jews to decide what prisoner should be released. Luke 1:62, The name of the infant John was referred to Zacharias' decision. John 17:24, Surely Christ does more than desire that those whom the Father has given him shall be with him. Luke 9:54, It is for Jesus to command fire upon the Samaritan villages if he so wills. (See, also, John 15:7; 1 Corinthians 4:21; Matthew 16:25; Matthew 19:17; John 21:22; Matthew 13:28; Matthew 17:12.) In the sense of wish or desire may fairly be cited 2 Corinthians 11:12; Matthew 12:38; Luke 8:20; Luke 23:8; John 12:21; Galatians 4:20; Matthew 7:12; Mark 10:35.3. A liking (Mark 12:38; Luke 20:46; Matthew 27:43). (See note there.) Βούλομαι occurs in the following senses:1.Inclination or disposition (Acts 18:27; Acts 19:30; Acts 25:22; Acts 28:18; 2" translation="">2 Corinthians 1:15).2.Stronger, with the idea of purpose (1 Timothy 6:9; James 1:18; James 3:4; 1 Corinthians 12:11; Hebrews 6:17).In most, if not all of these cases, we might expect θέλειν ; but in this use of βούλομαι there is an implied emphasis on the element of free choice or self-determination, which imparts to the desire or inclination a decretory force. This element is in the human will by gift and consent. In the divine will it is inherent. At this point the Homeric usage may be compared in its occasional employment of βούλομαι to express determination, but only with reference to the gods, in whom to wish is to will. Thus, “Whether Apollo will ( βου.λεται ) ward off the plague” (“II.,” 1:67). “Apollo willed ( βούλετο ) victory to the Trojans” (“Il.,” 7:21).To make a public example ( δειγματίσαι )The word is kindred to δείκνυμι , to exhibit, display, point out. Here, therefore, to expose Mary to public shame (Wyc., publish her; Tynd., defame her). The word occurs in Colossians 2:15, of the victorious Saviour displaying the vanquished powers of evil as a general displays his trophies or captives in a triumphal procession. “He made a show of them openly.” A compound of the same word ( παραδειγματίζω ) appears in Hebrews 6:6, “They crucify the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. ” [source]
Literally, “His very many mighty works” if elative as usual in the papyri (Moulton, Prolegomena, p. 79; Robertson, Grammar, p. 670). But the usual superlative makes sense here as the Canterbury translation has it. This word δυναμις dunamis for miracle presents the notion of power like our dynamite. The word τερας teras is wonder, portent, miraculum (miracle) as in Acts 2:19. It occurs only in the plural and always with σημεια sēmeia The word σημειον sēmeion means sign (Matthew 12:38) and is very common in John‘s Gospel as well as the word εργον ergon (work) as in John 5:36. Other words used are παραδοχον paradoxon our word paradox, strange (Luke 5:26), ενδοχον endoxon glorious (Luke 13:17), ταυμασιον thaumasion wonderful (Matthew 21:15). [source]
Objective genitive. This is the unpardonable sin. In Matthew 12:32 we have κατα του πνευματος του αγιου kata tou pneumatos tou hagiou to make it plainer. What is the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? These Pharisees had already committed it. They had attributed the works of the Holy Spirit by whose power Jesus wrought his miracles (Matthew 12:28) to the devil. That sin was without excuse and would not be forgiven in their age or in the coming one (Matthew 12:32). People often ask if they can commit the unpardonable sin. Probably some do who ridicule the manifest work of God‘s Spirit in men‘s lives and attribute the Spirit‘s work to the devil. [source]
These same terrible words the Baptist had used to the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to his baptism (Matthew 3:7). But these Pharisees had deliberately made their choice and had taken Satan‘s side. The charge against Jesus of being in league with Satan reveals the evil heart within. The heart “spurts out” (εκβαλλει ekballei) good or evil according to the supply (treasure, τησαυρου thēsaurou) within. Matthew 12:33 is like Matthew 7:17-19. Jesus often repeated his crisp pungent sayings as every teacher does. [source]
An ineffective, useless word A word that does no good and so is pernicious like pernicious anaemia. It is a solemn thought. Jesus who knows our very thoughts (Matthew 12:25) insists that our words reveal our thoughts and form a just basis for the interpretation of character (Matthew 12:37). Here we have judgment by words as in 25:31-46 where Jesus presents judgment by deeds. Both are real tests of actual character. Homer spoke of “winged words” And by the radio our words can be heard all round the earth. Who knows where they stop? [source]
The scribes and Pharisees had already asked for a sign (Matthew 12:38). Now this new combination adds “from heaven.” What did they have in mind? They may not have had any definite idea to embarrass Jesus. The Jewish apocalypses did speak of spectacular displays of power by the Son of Man (the Messiah). The devil had suggested that Jesus let the people see him drop down from the pinnacle of the temple and the people expected the Messiah to come from an unknown source (John 7:27) who would do great signs (John 7:31). Chrysostom (Hom. liii.) suggests stopping the course of the sun, bridling the moon, a clap of thunder. [source]
Same words in Matthew 12:39 except του προπητου tou prophētou a real doublet. [source]
Many theories have been suggested like the cross in the sky, etc. Bruce sees a reference to Daniel 7:13 “one like the Son of man” and holds that Christ himself is the sign in question (the genitive of apposition). This is certainly possible. It is confirmed by the rest of the verse: “They shall see the Son of man coming.” See Matthew 16:27; Matthew 26:64. The Jews had repeatedly asked for such a sign (Broadus) as in Matthew 12:38; Matthew 16:1; John 2:18. [source]
Jesus (Matthew 12:34; Matthew 23:33) will use the same language to the Pharisees. Broods of snakes were often seen by John in the rocks and when a fire broke out they would scurry No doubt the Pharisees and Sadducees winced under the sting of this powerful indictment. [source]
Their motive was bad.A sign from heaven (σημειον εκ του ουρανου sēmeion ek tou ouranou). The scribes and Pharisees had already asked for a sign (Matthew 12:38). Now this new combination adds “from heaven.” What did they have in mind? They may not have had any definite idea to embarrass Jesus. The Jewish apocalypses did speak of spectacular displays of power by the Son of Man (the Messiah). The devil had suggested that Jesus let the people see him drop down from the pinnacle of the temple and the people expected the Messiah to come from an unknown source (John 7:27) who would do great signs (John 7:31). Chrysostom (Hom. liii.) suggests stopping the course of the sun, bridling the moon, a clap of thunder. [source]
This profound saying throws a flood of light in every direction. The complement of this logion is that in Matthew 12:30: “He that is not with me is against me.” Both are needed. Some people imagine that they are really for Christ who refuse to take a stand in the open with him and for him. [source]
Matthew 16:4 has simply ου δοτησεται ou dothēsetai plain negative with the future passive indicative. Mark has ει ei instead of ου ou which is technically a conditional clause with the conclusion unexpressed (Robertson, Grammar, p. 1024), really aposiopesis in imitation of the Hebrew use of ιμ im This is the only instance in the N.T. except in quotations from the lxx (Hebrews 3:11; Hebrews 4:3, Hebrews 4:5). It is very common in the lxx. The rabbis were splitting hairs over the miracles of Jesus as having a possible natural explanation (as some critics do today) even if by the power of Beelzebub, and those not of the sky (from heaven) which would be manifested from God. So they put up this fantastic test to Jesus which he deeply resents. Matthew 16:4 adds “but the sign of Jonah” mentioned already by Jesus on a previous occasion (Matthew 12:39-41) at more length and to be mentioned again (Luke 11:32). But the mention of the sign of Jonah was “an absolute refusal of signs in their sense” (Bruce). And when he did rise from the dead on the third day, the Sanhedrin refused to be convinced (see Acts 3 to 5). [source]
See on adulterous. Matthew 12:39. [source]
This verse is just like Matthew 12:30. [source]
Luke does not give here the burial and resurrection of Jesus of which Jonah‘s experience in the big fish was a type (Matthew 12:39), but that is really implied (Plummer argues) by the use here of “shall be given” (δοτησεται dothēsetai) and “shall be” (εσται estai), for the resurrection of Jesus is still future. The preaching of Jesus ought to have been sign enough as in the case of Jonah, but the resurrection will be given. Luke‘s report is much briefer and omits what is in Matthew 12:41. [source]
This unpardonable sin is given by Mark 3:28.; Matthew 12:31. immediately after the charge that Jesus was in league with Beelzebub. Luke here separates it from the same charge made in Judea (Luke 11:15-20). As frequently said, there is no sound reason for saying that Jesus only spoke his memorable sayings once. Luke apparently finds a different environment here. Note the use of εις eis here in the sense of “against.” [source]
Literally, which. Mark 2:25; Matthew 12:3 have τι ti (what). [source]
. Mark 2:25; Matthew 12:3 have τι ti (what). [source]
Plummer thinks that the second half of the sermon begins here as indicated by Luke‘s insertion of “And he spake Jesus repeated these sayings on various occasions as every teacher does his characteristic ideas. So Luke 6:40; Matthew 10:24, Luke 6:45; Matthew 12:34. [source]
In a similar saying repeated later. Matthew 12:34. has the verb εκβαλλει ekballei (throws out, casts out), a bolder figure. “When men are natural, heart and mouth act in concert. But otherwise the mouth sometimes professes what the heart does not feel” (Plummer). [source]
Literally, as Rev., cast out. See on Matthew 10:34; see on Matthew 12:35; see on Mark 1:12; see on James 2:25. [source]
See on Luke 6:22. Notice the titles successively applied to our Lord in this chapter: the greater Successor of the Baptist, the Lamb of God, the Son of God, the Messiah, the King of Israel. These were all given by others. The title Son of man He applies to Himself. In John's Gospel, as in the Synoptists, this phrase is used only by Christ in speaking of Himself; and elsewhere only in Acts 7:56, where the name is applied to Him by Stephen. It occurs less frequently in John than in the Synoptists, being found in Matthew thirty times, in Mark thirteen, and in John twelve. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Jesus' use of the term here is explained in two ways. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- I. That He borrows the title from the Old Testament to designate Himself either: (a ) as a prophet, as in Ezekiel 2:1-3; Ezekiel 3:1, etc.; or (b ) as the Messiah, as prefigured in Daniel 7:13. This prophecy of Daniel had obtained such wide currency that the Messiah was called Anani, or the man of the clouds. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (a.) This is untenable, because in Ezekiel, as everywhere in the Old Testament, the phrase Son of man, or Sons of men, is used to describe man under his human limitations, as weak, fallible, and incompetent by himself to be a divine agent. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (b.) The allusion to Daniel's prophecy is admitted; but Jesus does not mean to say, “I am the Messiah who is prefigured by Daniel.” A political meaning attached in popular conception to the term Messiah; and it is noticeable throughout John's Gospel that Jesus carefully avoids using that term before the people, but expresses the thing itself by circumlocution, in order to avoid the complication which the popular understanding would have introduced into his work. See John 8:24, John 8:25; John 10:24, John 10:25. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Moreover, the phrase Son of man was not generally applied to the Messiah. On the contrary, John 5:27and John 12:34show that it was set off against that term. Compare Matthew 16:13, Matthew 16:15. Son of God is the Messianic title, which, with one exception, appears in confessions (John 1:34, John 1:49; John 11:27; John 20:31). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In Daniel the reference is exclusively to the final stage of human affairs. The point is the final establishment of the divine kingdom. Moreover, Daniel does not say “the Son of man,” but “one like a Son of man.” Compare Revelation 1:13; Revelation 14:14, where also the article is omitted. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- II. The second, and correct explanation is that the phrase Son of man is the expression of Christ's self-consciousness as being related to humanity as a whole: denoting His real participation in human nature, and designating Himself as the representative man. It thus corresponds with the passage in Daniel, where the earthly kingdoms are represented by beasts, but the divine kingdom by a Son of man. Hence, too, the word ἄνθρωπος is purposely used (see on a man, John 1:30, and compare John 8:40). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- While the human element was thus emphasized in the phrase, the consciousness of Jesus, as thus expressed, did not exclude His divine nature and claims, but rather regarded these through the medium of His humanity. He showed Himself divine in being thus profoundly human. Hence two aspects of the phrase appear in John, as in the Synoptists. The one regards His earthly life and work, and involves His being despised; His accommodation to the conditions of human life; the partial veiling of His divine nature; the loving character of His mission; His liability to misinterpretation; and His outlook upon a consummation of agony. On the other hand, He is possessed of supreme authority; He is about His Father's work; He reveals glimpses of His divine nature through His humanity; His presence and mission entail serious responsibility upon those to whom He appeals; and He foresees a consummation of glory no less than of agony. See Matthew 8:20; Matthew 11:19; Matthew 12:8, Matthew 12:32; Matthew 13:37; Matthew 16:13; Matthew 20:18; Matthew 26:64; Mark 8:31, Mark 8:38; Mark 14:21; Luke 9:26, Luke 9:58; Luke 12:8; Luke 17:22; Luke 19:10; Luke 22:69. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The other aspect is related to the future. He has visions of another life of glory and dominion; though present in the flesh, His coming is still future, and will be followed by a judgment which is committed to Him, and by the final glory of His redeemed in His heavenly kingdom. See Matthew 10:23; Matthew 13:40sqq.; Matthew 16:27sqq.; Matthew 19:28; Matthew 24:27, Matthew 24:37, Matthew 24:44; Matthew 25:31sqq.; Mark 13:26; Luke 6:22; Luke 17:24, Luke 17:30; Luke 18:8; Luke 21:27. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
Old word from μιστοω misthoō to hire (Matthew 20:1) from μιστος misthos (hire, wages, Luke 10:7), in N.T. only in this passage. Literally, “the hireling and not being a shepherd” Note ουκ ouk with the participle ων ōn to emphasize the certainty that he is not a shepherd in contrast with μη εισερχομενος mē eiserchomenos in John 10:1 (conceived case). See same contrast in 1 Peter 1:8 between ουκ ιδοντες ouk idontes and μη ορωντες mē horōntes The hireling here is not necessarily the thief and robber of John 10:1, John 10:8. He may conceivably be a nominal shepherd (pastor) of the flock who serves only for the money, a sin against which Peter warned the shepherds of the flock “not for shameful gain” (1 Peter 5:2). Whose own Every true shepherd considers the sheep in his care “his own” Vivid dramatic present, active indicative of τεωρεω theōreō a graphic picture. The wolf coming Present middle predicate participle of ερχομαι erchomai Leaveth the sheep, and fleeth Graphic present actives again of απιημι aphiēmi and πευγω pheugō The cowardly hireling cares naught for the sheep, but only for his own skin. The wolf was the chief peril to sheep in Palestine. See Matthew 10:6 where Jesus says: “Behold I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves.” And the wolf snatcheth them and scattereth them Vivid parenthesis in the midst of the picture of the conduct of the hireling. Bold verbs these. For the old verb αρπαζω harpazō see John 6:15; Matthew 11:12, and for σκορπιζω skorpizō late word (Plutarch) for the Attic σκεδαννυμι skedannumi see Matthew 12:30. It occurs in the vision of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 34:5) where because of the careless shepherds “the sheep became meat to all the beasts of the field, and were scattered.” Jesus uses αρπαζω harpazō in John 10:29 where no one is able “to snatch” one out of the Father‘s hand. [source]
Futuristic present middle indicative of ερχομαι erchomai Yea, is come Explanatory use of και kai and the perfect active indicative as in John 12:23. The long-looked-for hour See John 16:2 for this same use of ινα hina (not οτε hote) with ερχομαι ωρα erchomai hōra Ye shall be scattered First aorist passive subjunctive of σκορπιζω skorpizō used in John 10:12 of sheep scampering from the wolf. Cf. Matthew 12:30; Luke 11:33. To his own “To his own home” as in John 1:11; John 19:27. So Appian VI. 23. Shall leave Second aorist subjunctive of απιημι aphiēmi with ινα hina And yet Clear case of και kai in adversative sense, not just “and.” [source]
“Concerning a good deed we are not stoning thee.” Flat denial that the healing of the blind man on the Sabbath had led them to this attempt (John 8:59) in spite of the facts. But for blasphemy See Acts 26:7 where περι peri with the genitive is also used with εγκαλουμαι egkaloumai for the charge against Paul. This is the only example in John of the word βλασπημια blasphēmia (cf. Matthew 12:31). And because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God In John 5:18 they stated the charge more accurately: “He called God his own Father, making himself equal with God.” That is, he made himself the Son of God. This he did beyond a doubt. But was it blasphemy? Only if he was not the Son of God. The penalty for blasphemy was death by stoning (Leviticus 24:16; 1 Kings 21:10, 1 Kings 21:13). [source]
Grammatical neuter, but “whom” is correct translation. The Father will send the Holy Spirit (John 14:16; Luke 24:49; Acts 2:33), but so will the Son (John 15:26; John 16:7) as Jesus breathes the Holy Spirit upon the disciples (John 20:22). There is no contradiction in this relation of the Persons in the Trinity (the Procession of the Holy Spirit). Here the Holy Spirit (full title as in Mark 3:29; Matthew 12:32; Luke 12:10) is identified with the Paraclete. He Emphatic demonstrative pronoun and masculine like παρακλητος paraklētos Shall teach you all things The Holy Spirit knows “the deep things of God” (1 Corinthians 2:10) and he is our Teacher in the Dispensation of the Holy Spirit of both new truth (John 14:25) and old. Bring to your remembrance Future active indicative of υπομιμνησκω hupomimnēskō old verb to remind, to recall, here only in this Gospel (cf. 3 John 1:10; 2 Timothy 2:14) and with two accusatives (person and thing). After pentecost the disciples will be able better to recall and to understand what Jesus had said (how dull they had been at times) and to be open to new revelations from God (cf. Peter at Joppa and Caesarea). [source]
Certainly they can “understand” It was like a bombshell in spite of the preliminary preparation. Your will to do Present active indicative of τελω thelō and present active infinitive, “Ye wish to go on doing.” This same idea Jesus presents in Matthew 13:38 (the sons of the evil one, the devil) and Matthew 23:15 (twofold more a son of Gehenna than you). See also 1 John 3:8 for “of the devil” He even called them “broods of vipers” as Jesus did later (Matthew 12:34). A murderer Old and rare word (Euripides) from αντρωπος anthrōpos man, and κτεινω kteinō to kill. In N.T. only here and 1 John 3:15. The Jews were seeking to kill Jesus and so like their father the devil. Stood not in the truth Since ουκ ouk not ουχ ouch is genuine, the form of the verb is εστεκεν esteken the imperfect of the late present stem στηκω stēkō (Mark 11:25) from the perfect active εστηκα hestēka (intransitive) of ιστημι histēmi to place. No truth in him Inside him or outside (environment). The devil and truth have no contact. When he speaketh a lie Indefinite temporal clause with οταν hotan and the present active subjunctive of λαλεω laleō But note the article το to “Whenever he speaks the lie,” as he is sure to do because it is his nature. Hence “he speaks out of his own” For he is a liar Old word for the agent in a conscious falsehood See 1 John 1:10; Romans 3:4. Common word in John because of the emphasis on αλητεια alētheia (truth). And the father thereof (και ο πατηρ αυτου kai ho patēr autou). Either the father of the lie or of the liar, both of which are true as already shown by Jesus. Autou in the genitive can be either neuter or masculine. Westcott takes it thus, “because he is a liar and his father (the devil) is a liar,” making “one,” not the devil, the subject of “whenever he speaks,” a very doubtful expression. [source]
Present active indicative of τελω thelō and present active infinitive, “Ye wish to go on doing.” This same idea Jesus presents in Matthew 13:38 (the sons of the evil one, the devil) and Matthew 23:15 (twofold more a son of Gehenna than you). See also 1 John 3:8 for “of the devil” He even called them “broods of vipers” as Jesus did later (Matthew 12:34). A murderer Old and rare word (Euripides) from αντρωπος anthrōpos man, and κτεινω kteinō to kill. In N.T. only here and 1 John 3:15. The Jews were seeking to kill Jesus and so like their father the devil. Stood not in the truth Since ουκ ouk not ουχ ouch is genuine, the form of the verb is εστεκεν esteken the imperfect of the late present stem στηκω stēkō (Mark 11:25) from the perfect active εστηκα hestēka (intransitive) of ιστημι histēmi to place. No truth in him Inside him or outside (environment). The devil and truth have no contact. When he speaketh a lie Indefinite temporal clause with οταν hotan and the present active subjunctive of λαλεω laleō But note the article το to “Whenever he speaks the lie,” as he is sure to do because it is his nature. Hence “he speaks out of his own” For he is a liar Old word for the agent in a conscious falsehood See 1 John 1:10; Romans 3:4. Common word in John because of the emphasis on αλητεια alētheia (truth). And the father thereof (και ο πατηρ αυτου kai ho patēr autou). Either the father of the lie or of the liar, both of which are true as already shown by Jesus. Autou in the genitive can be either neuter or masculine. Westcott takes it thus, “because he is a liar and his father (the devil) is a liar,” making “one,” not the devil, the subject of “whenever he speaks,” a very doubtful expression. [source]
Condition of second class with imperfect indicative in the protasis. The old word τυπλος tuphlos is from τυπω tuphō to raise a smoke, to blind by smoke (literally and metaphorically). Here, of course, it is moral blindness. If the Pharisees were born morally blind, they would, like idiots, be without responsibility. Ye would not have sin Regular form for conclusion of second-class condition, αν an with imperfect. But now ye say In contrast to the previous condition. See like contrast in John 15:22, John 15:24. They arrogantly asserted superior knowledge. We see The ignorant mob do not (John 7:49). It is sin against light and is hopeless (Mark 3:29; Matthew 12:31.). “Ye are witnesses against yourselves” (μαρτυρειτε εαυτοις martureite heautois Matthew 23:31). [source]
“Some multitude (or pile) of dry twigs” Laid (επιτεντος epithentos). So genitive absolute again with second aorist active participle of επιτιτημι epitithēmi to place upon. Few things show Paul to better advantage than this incident. By reason of the heat Old word, only here in N.T. Ablative case with απο apo (from the heat). The viper was in a state of torpor in the bundle of sticks. The heat wakened him. A viper (εχιδνα echidna). The old word used by the Baptist of the Pharisees (Matthew 3:7; Luke 3:7) and by Jesus also (Matthew 12:34; Matthew 23:33). It is objected that there is little wood in the island today and no vipers, though Lewin as late as 1853 believes that he saw a viper near St. Paul‘s Bay. But the island now has 1, 200 people to the square mile and snakes of any kind have a poor chance. The viper has also disappeared from Arran as the island became more frequented (Knowling). Ramsay thinks that the small constrictor (Coronella Austriaca) which still exists in the island may be the “viper,” though it has no poison fangs, but clings and bites. The natives thought that it was a poisonous viper. Fastened on his hand First aorist active indicative of καταπτω kathaptō to fasten down on with the genitive case. Old verb, here only in N.T. Cf. Mark 16:18. [source]
The old word used by the Baptist of the Pharisees (Matthew 3:7; Luke 3:7) and by Jesus also (Matthew 12:34; Matthew 23:33). It is objected that there is little wood in the island today and no vipers, though Lewin as late as 1853 believes that he saw a viper near St. Paul‘s Bay. But the island now has 1, 200 people to the square mile and snakes of any kind have a poor chance. The viper has also disappeared from Arran as the island became more frequented (Knowling). Ramsay thinks that the small constrictor (Coronella Austriaca) which still exists in the island may be the “viper,” though it has no poison fangs, but clings and bites. The natives thought that it was a poisonous viper. [source]
Si forte. This idiom, though with the future indicative and so a condition of the first class (determined as fulfilled), yet minimizes the chance of forgiveness as in Mark 11:13. Peter may have thought that his sin was close to the unpardonable sin (Matthew 12:31), but he does not close the door of hope. The thought (η επινοια hē epinoia). Old Greek word from επινοεω epinoeō to think upon, and so purpose. Only here in the N.T. [source]
Old word, only here in N.T. Ablative case with απο apo (from the heat). The viper was in a state of torpor in the bundle of sticks. The heat wakened him. A viper (εχιδνα echidna). The old word used by the Baptist of the Pharisees (Matthew 3:7; Luke 3:7) and by Jesus also (Matthew 12:34; Matthew 23:33). It is objected that there is little wood in the island today and no vipers, though Lewin as late as 1853 believes that he saw a viper near St. Paul‘s Bay. But the island now has 1, 200 people to the square mile and snakes of any kind have a poor chance. The viper has also disappeared from Arran as the island became more frequented (Knowling). Ramsay thinks that the small constrictor (Coronella Austriaca) which still exists in the island may be the “viper,” though it has no poison fangs, but clings and bites. The natives thought that it was a poisonous viper. Fastened on his hand First aorist active indicative of καταπτω kathaptō to fasten down on with the genitive case. Old verb, here only in N.T. Cf. Mark 16:18. [source]
The punishment for blasphemy was stoning to death. See note on Matthew 12:31 for discussion of the word βλασπημια βλασπημεω βλασπημος blasphēmiaβλαπτω blasphēmeōπημη blasphēmos all in the N.T. from βλαχ blaptō to harm, and πημη phēmē speech, harmful speech, or blax stupid, and phēmē But the charge against Stephen was untrue. Please note that Moses is here placed before God and practically on a par with God in the matter of blasphemy. The purpose of this charge is to stir the prejudices of the people in the matter of Jewish rights and privileges. It is the Pharisees who are conducting this attack on Stephen while the Sadducees had led them against Peter and John. The position of Stephen is critical in the extreme for the Sadducees will not help him as Gamaliel did the apostles. [source]
Future active indicative of χρηματιζω chrēmatizō old verb, to receive a name as in Acts 11:26, from χρημα chrēma business, from χραομαι chraomai to use, then to give an oracle, etc. An adulteress (μοιχαλις moichalis). Late word, in Plutarch, lxx. See note on Matthew 12:39. If she be joined Third class condition, “if she come to.” So that she is no adulteress (tou mē einai autēn moichalida). It is a fact that εαν γενηται tou and the infinitive is used for result as we saw in Romans 1:24. Conceived result may explain the idiom here. [source]
Late word, in Plutarch, lxx. See note on Matthew 12:39. [source]
Rev., ask. But it is questionable whether the A.V. is not preferable. The word sometimes takes the sense of demand, as Luke 12:48; 1 Peter 3:15; and this sense accords well with the haughty attitude of the Jews, demanding of all apostolic religions their proofs and credentials. See Matthew 12:38; Matthew 16:1; John 6:30. [source]
The Jews often came to Jesus asking for signs (Matthew 12:38; Matthew 16:1; John 6:30). Seek after wisdom (σοπιαν ζητουσιν sophian zētousin). “The Jews claimed to possess the truth: the Greeks were seekers, speculators ” (Vincent) as in Acts 17:23. [source]
Perfect passive indicative of old verb πλατυνω platunō to broaden, from πλατυς platus broad. In N T. only here and Matthew 23:5 (cf. phylacteries). Hence his freedom of speech for “out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks” (Matthew 12:34). [source]
Late word from περισσευω perisseuō like περισσεια perisseia (2 Corinthians 8:2) Cf. Matthew 12:34. Want (υστερημα husterēma). Late word from υστερεω hustereō to be in want. See also 2 Corinthians 9:12; Luke 21:4 (cf. υστερησις husterēsis in Mark 12:44). [source]
First aorist active indicative of σκορπιζω skorpizō to scatter, Koiné{[28928]}š verb for σκεδαννυμι skedannumi of the Attic. Probably akin to σκορπιος skorpios (scorpion) from root σκαρπ skarp to cut asunder. See note on Matthew 12:30. It is like sowing seed. To the poor (tois penēsin). Old word from penamai to work for one‘s living. Latin penuria and Greek τοις πενησιν peinaō to be hungry, are kin to it. Only N.T. instance and to be distinguished from πεναμαι ptōchos beggar, abjectly poor. [source]
“Age.” See this identical expression in Matthew 12:32 for the present time (Galatians 1:4; 1 Timothy 6:17) and the future life (Ephesians 2:7; Luke 20:35). Both combined in Mark 10:30; Luke 18:30. [source]
For glory see on 1 Thessalonians 2:12. Ἱσχὺς powernot often in Paul. It is indwelling power put forth or embodied, either aggressively or as an obstacle to resistance: physical power organized or working under individual direction. An army and a fortress are both ἰσχυρὸς. The power inhering in the magistrate, which is put forth in laws or judicial decisions, is ἰσχὺς , and makes the edicts ἰσχυρὰ validand hard to resist. Δύναμις is the indwelling power which comes to manifestation in ἰσχὺς The precise phrase used here does not appear elsewhere in N.T. In lxx, Isaiah 2:10, Isaiah 2:19, Isaiah 2:21. The power ( δύναμις ) and glory of God are associated in Matthew 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27; Revelation 4:11; Revelation 19:1. Comp. κράτος τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ strengthof his glory, Colossians 1:11. Additional Note on ὄλεθρον αἰώνιον eternaldestruction, 2 Thessalonians 1:9 Ἁιών transliterated eon is a period of time of longer or shorter duration, having a beginning and an end, and complete in itself. Aristotle ( περὶ οὐρανοῦ , i. 9,15) says: “The period which includes the whole time of each one's life is called the eon of each one.” Hence it often means the life of a man, as in Homer, where one's life ( αἰών ) is said to leave him or to consume away (Il. v. 685; Od. v. 160). It is not, however, limited to human life; it signifies any period in the course of events, as the period or age before Christ; the period of the millennium; the mytho-logical period before the beginnings of history. The word has not “a stationary and mechanical value” (De Quincey). It does not mean a period of a fixed length for all cases. There are as many eons as entities, the respective durations of which are fixed by the normal conditions of the several entities. There is one eon of a human life, another of the life of a nation, another of a crow's life, another of an oak's life. The length of the eon depends on the subject to which it is attached. It is sometimes translated world; world representing a period or a series of periods of time. See Matthew 12:32; Matthew 13:40, Matthew 13:49; Luke 1:70; 1 Corinthians 1:20; 1 Corinthians 2:6; Ephesians 1:21. Similarly οἱ αἰῶνες theworlds, the universe, the aggregate of the ages or periods, and their contents which are included in the duration of the world. 1 Corinthians 2:7; 1 Corinthians 10:11; Hebrews 1:2; Hebrews 9:26; Hebrews 11:3. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The word always carries the notion of time, and not of eternity. It always means a period of time. Otherwise it would be impossible to account for the plural, or for such qualifying expressions as this age, or the age to come. It does not mean something endless or everlasting. To deduce that meaning from its relation to ἀεί is absurd; for, apart from the fact that the meaning of a word is not definitely fixed by its derivation, ἀεί does not signify endless duration. When the writer of the Pastoral Epistles quotes the saying that the Cretans are always ( ἀεί ) liars (Titus 1:12), he surely does not mean that the Cretans will go on lying to all eternity. See also Acts 7:51; 2 Corinthians 4:11; 2 Corinthians 6:10; Hebrews 3:10; 1 Peter 3:15. Ἁεί means habitually or continually within the limit of the subject's life. In our colloquial dialect everlastingly is used in the same way. “The boy is everlastingly tormenting me to buy him a drum.”-DIVIDER- In the New Testament the history of the world is conceived as developed through a succession of eons. A series of such eons precedes the introduction of a new series inaugurated by the Christian dispensation, and the end of the world and the second coming of Christ are to mark the beginning of another series. See Ephesians 3:11. Paul contemplates eons before and after the Christian era. Ephesians 1:21; Ephesians 2:7; Ephesians 3:9, Ephesians 3:21; 1 Corinthians 10:11; comp. Hebrews 9:26. He includes the series of eons in one great eon, ὁ αἰὼν τῶν αἰώνων theeon of the eons (Ephesians 3:21); and the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews describes the throne of God as enduring unto the eon of the eons (Hebrews 1:8). The plural is also used, eons of the eons, signifying all the successive periods which make up the sum total of the ages collectively. Romans 16:27; Galatians 1:5; Philemon 4:20, etc. This plural phrase is applied by Paul to God only. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The adjective αἰώνιος in like manner carries the idea of time. Neither the noun nor the adjective, in themselves, carry the sense of endless or everlasting. They may acquire that sense by their connotation, as, on the other hand, ἀΐ̀διος , which means everlasting, has its meaning limited to a given point of time in Judges 1:6. Ἁιώνιος means enduring through or pertaining to a period of time. Both the noun and the adjective are applied to limited periods. Thus the phrase εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα , habitually rendered forever, is often used of duration which is limited in the very nature of the case. See, for a few out of many instances, lxx, Exodus 21:6; Exodus 29:9; Exodus 32:13; Joshua 14:9; 1 Samuel 8:13; Leviticus 25:46; Deuteronomy 15:17; 1 Chronicles 28:4. See also Matthew 21:19; John 13:8; 1 Corinthians 8:13. The same is true of αἰώνιος . Out of 150 instances in lxx, four-fifths imply limited duration. For a few instances see Genesis 48:4; Numbers 10:8; Numbers 15:15; Proverbs 22:28; Jonah 2:6; Habakkuk 3:6; Isaiah 61:8. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Words which are habitually applied to things temporal or material can not carry in themselves the sense of endlessness. Even when applied to God, we are not forced to render αἰώνιος everlastingOf course the life of God is endless; but the question is whether, in describing God as αἰώνιος , it was intended to describe the duration of his being, or whether some different and larger idea was not contemplated. That God lives longer than men, and lives on everlastingly, and has lived everlastingly, are, no doubt, great and significant facts; yet they are not the dominant or the most impressive facts in God's relations to time. God's eternity does not stand merely or chiefly for a scale of length. It is not primarily a mathematical but a moral fact. The relations of God to time include and imply far more than the bare fact of endless continuance. They carry with them the fact that God transcends time; works on different principles and on a vaster scale than the wisdom of time provides; oversteps the conditions and the motives of time; marshals the successive eons from a point outside of time, on lines which run out into his own measureless cycles, and for sublime moral ends which the creature of threescore and ten years cannot grasp and does not even suspect. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- There is a word for everlasting if that idea is demanded. That αἰώνιος occurs rarely in the New Testament and in lxx does not prove that its place was taken by αἰώνιος . It rather goes to show that less importance was attached to the bare idea of everlastingness than later theological thought has given it. Paul uses the word once, in Romans 1:20, where he speaks of “the everlasting power and divinity of God.” In Romans 16:26he speaks of the eternal God ( τοῦ αἰωνίου θεοῦ ); but that he does not mean the everlasting God is perfectly clear from the context. He has said that “the mystery” has been kept in silence in times eternal ( χρόνοις αἰωνίοις ), by which he does not mean everlasting times, but the successive eons which elapsed before Christ was proclaimed. God therefore is described as the God of the eons, the God who pervaded and controlled those periods before the incarnation. To the same effect is the title ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν αἰώνων theKing of the eons, applied to God in 1 Timothy 1:17; Revelation 15:3; comp. 2Timothy href="/desk/?q=2ti+1:9&sr=1">2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2), cannot mean before everlasting times. To say that God bestowed grace on men, or promised them eternal life before endless times, would be absurd. The meaning is of old, as Luke 1:70. The grace and the promise were given in time, but far back in the ages, before the times of reckoning the eons. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Ζωὴ αἰώνιος eternallife, which occurs 42 times in N.T., but not in lxx, is not endless life, but life pertaining to a certain age or eon, or continuing during that eon. I repeat, life may be endless. The life in union with Christ is endless, but the fact is not expressed by αἰώνιος . Κόλασις αἰώνιος , rendered everlasting punishment (Matthew 25:46), is the punishment peculiar to an eon other than that in which Christ is speaking. In some cases ζωὴ αἰώνιος does not refer specifically to the life beyond time, but rather to the eon or dispensation of Messiah which succeeds the legal dispensation. See Matthew 19:16; John 5:39. John says that ζωὴ αἰώνιος is the present possession of those who believe on the Son of God, John 3:36; John 5:24; John 6:47, John 6:64. The Father's commandment is ζωὴ αἰώσιος , John 12:50; to know the only true God and Jesus Christ is ζωὴ αἰώνιος , John 17:3. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Bishop Westcott very justly says, commenting upon the terms used by John to describe life under different aspects: “In considering these phrases it is necessary to premise that in spiritual things we must guard against all conclusions which rest upon the notions of succession and duration. 'Eternal life' is that which St. Paul speaks of as ἡ ὄντως ζωὴ thelife which is life indeed, and ἡ ζωὴ τοῦ θεοῦ thelife of God. It is not an endless duration of being in time, but being of which time is not a measure. We have indeed no powers to grasp the idea except through forms and images of sense. These must be used, but we must not transfer them as realities to another order.”-DIVIDER- Thus, while αἰώνιος carries the idea of time, though not of endlessness, there belongs to it also, more or less, a sense of quality. Its character is ethical rather than mathematical. The deepest significance of the life beyond time lies, not in endlessness, but in the moral quality of the eon into which the life passes. It is comparatively unimportant whether or not the rich fool, when his soul was required of him (Luke 12:20), entered upon a state that was endless. The principal, the tremendous fact, as Christ unmistakably puts it, was that, in the new eon, the motives, the aims, the conditions, the successes and awards of time counted for nothing. In time, his barns and their contents were everything; the soul was nothing. In the new life the soul was first and everything, and the barns and storehouses nothing. The bliss of the sanctified does not consist primarily in its endlessness, but in the nobler moral conditions of the new eon, - the years of the holy and eternal God. Duration is a secondary idea. When it enters it enters as an accompaniment and outgrowth of moral conditions. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In the present passage it is urged that ὄλεθρον destructionpoints to an unchangeable, irremediable, and endless condition. If this be true, if ὄλεθρος isextinction, then the passage teaches the annihilation of the wicked, in which case the adjective αἰώνιος is superfluous, since extinction is final, and excludes the idea of duration. But ὄλεθρος does not always mean destruction or extinction. Take the kindred verb ἀπόλλυμι todestroy, put an end to, or in the middle voice, to be lost, to perish. Peter says, “the world being deluged with water, perished ” ( ἀπολοῦνται 2 Peter 3:6); but the world did not become extinct, it was renewed. In Hebrews 1:11, Hebrews 1:12quoted from Isaiah href="/desk/?q=isa+51:6&sr=1">Isaiah 51:6, Isaiah 51:16; Isaiah 65:17; Isaiah 66:22; 2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1. Similarly, “the Son of man came to save that which was lost ” ( ἀπολωλός ), Luke 19:10. Jesus charged his apostles to go to the lost ( ἀπολωλότα ) sheep of the house of Israel, Matthew 10:6, comp. Matthew 15:24. “He that shall lose ( ἀπολέσῃ ) his life for my sake shall find it,” Matthew 16:25. Comp. Luke 15:6, Luke 15:9, Luke 15:32. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In this passage the word destruction is qualified. It is “destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power, “ at his second coming, in the new eon. In other words, it is the severance, at a given point of time, of those who obey not the gospel from the presence and the glory of Christ. Ἁιώνιος may therefore describe this severance as continuing during the millennial eon between Christ's coming and the final judgment; as being for the wicked prolonged throughout that eon and characteristic of it, or it may describe the severance as characterizing or enduring through a period or eon succeeding the final judgment, the extent of which period is not defined. In neither case is αἰώνιος to be interpreted as everlasting or endless.sa180 [source]
Present middle imperative of πειτω peithō with dative case. Submit Present active imperative of υπεικω hupeikō old compound to yield under, to give up. Here only in N.T. They watch Present active indicative of αγρυπνεω agrupneō old verb (from αγρεω agreō to search, υπνος hupnos sleep), to seek after sleep, to be sleepless, be watchful (Mark 13:33). As they that shall give account Regular Greek idiom with ως hōs and the future participle. For λογον αποδιδωμι logon apodidōmi to render account, see Matthew 12:36. These leaders as good shepherds recognize keenly their responsibility for the welfare of the flock. And not with grief “And not groaning” (cf. Romans 8:23). Unprofitable Old double compound adjective (alpha privative and λυσιτελης lusitelēs and this from λυω luō to pay, and τελος telos tax, useful or profitable as Luke 17:2), not profitable, not advantageous, by litotes, hurtful, pernicious. Common rhetorical litotes, here only in N.T. [source]
The feminine term is the general designation of all whom James here rebukes. The apostate members of the church are figuratively regarded as unfaithful spouses; according to the common Old-Testament figure, in which God is the bridegroom or husband to whom his people are wedded. See Hosea 2, Hosea href="/desk/?q=ho+3:1-5&sr=1">Hosea 3:1-5, 4; Isaiah 54:5; Isaiah 62:4, Isaiah 62:5. Also, Matthew 12:39; 2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation 19:7; Revelation 21:9. [source]
Goes on with the singular objector and demolishes him. For “empty” (deficient) Paul uses απρων aphrōn (fool) in 1 Corinthians 15:36 and just αντρωπε anthrōpe in Romans 2:1; Romans 9:20.Barren (αργε arge). See 2 Peter 1:8 (not idle nor unfruitful) and Matthew 12:36, but Hort urges “inactive” as the idea here, like money with no interest and land with no crops. [source]
See 2 Peter 1:8 (not idle nor unfruitful) and Matthew 12:36, but Hort urges “inactive” as the idea here, like money with no interest and land with no crops. [source]
Future active indicative of αποδιδωμι apodidōmi For this use with λογον logon (account) see Matthew 12:36; Luke 16:2; Acts 19:40; Hebrews 13:17. For the sudden use of the relative οι hoi see Romans 3:8. [source]
From ἀ , not, and ἔργον , work. Hence, more correctly, as Rev., idle. Compare “idle word” (Matthew 12:36); “standing idle ” (Matthew 20:3, Matthew 20:6); also, 1 Timothy 5:13. The tautology, barren and unfruitful, is thus avoided. [source]
Lit., the day of judgment. The exact phrase occurs here only. Ἡμέρᾳ κρίσεως dayof judgment, without the articles, is found Matthew 10:15; Matthew 11:22, Matthew 11:24; Matthew 12:36; 2 Peter 2:9; 2 Peter 3:7. The day is called the great day of their wrath (Revelation 6:17); the day of wrath and of revelation of the righteous judgement of God (Romans 2:5); the day of visitation (1 Peter 2:12); the last day (John 6:39, John 6:40, John 6:44, John 6:54); that day (Matthew 7:22; Luke 6:23; Luke 10:12). The judgment is found Matthew 12:41, Matthew 12:42; Luke 10:14; Luke 11:31, Luke 11:32. [source]
Present active predicate (supplementary) participle agreeing with αδελπον adelphon and with cognate accusative αμαρτιαν hamartian unto death Repeated again with αμαρτανουσιν hamartanousin and in contrast with αμαρτια προς τανατον hamartia pros thanaton (sin unto death). Most sins are not mortal sins, but clearly John conceives of a sin that is deadly enough to be called “unto death.” This distinction is common in the rabbinic writings and in Numbers 18:22 the lxx has λαβειν αμαρτιαν τανατηπορον labein hamartian thanatēphoron “to incur a death-bearing sin” as many crimes then and now bear the death penalty. There is a distinction in Hebrews 10:26 between sinning wilfully after full knowledge and sins of ignorance (Hebrews 5:2). Jesus spoke of the unpardonable sin (Mark 3:29; Matthew 12:32; Luke 12:10), which was attributing to the devil the manifest work of the Holy Spirit. It is possible that John has this idea in mind when he applies it to those who reject Jesus Christ as God‘s Son and set themselves up as antichrists.Concerning this (περι εκεινης peri ekeinēs). This sin unto death.That he should make request Sub-final use of ινα hina with the first aorist active subjunctive of ερωταω erōtaō used here as in John 17:15, John 17:20 (and often) for request rather than for question. John does not forbid praying for such cases; he simply does not command prayer for them. He leaves them to God. [source]