KJV: When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
YLT: When therefore the Lord knew that the Pharisees heard that Jesus more disciples doth make and baptize than John,
Darby: When therefore the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus makes and baptises more disciples than John
ASV: When therefore the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John
| ἔγνω | knew |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Active, 3rd Person Singular Root: γινώσκω Sense: to learn to know, come to know, get a knowledge of perceive, feel. |
|
| ὁ | - |
|
Parse: Article, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| Ἰησοῦς | Jesus |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Ἰησοῦς Sense: Joshua was the famous captain of the Israelites, Moses’ successor. |
|
| ὅτι | that |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: ὅτι Sense: that, because, since. |
|
| ἤκουσαν | heard |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Active, 3rd Person Plural Root: ἀκουστός Sense: to be endowed with the faculty of hearing, not deaf. |
|
| Φαρισαῖοι | Pharisees |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: Φαρισαῖος Sense: A sect that seems to have started after the Jewish exile. |
|
| Ἰησοῦς | Jesus |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Ἰησοῦς Sense: Joshua was the famous captain of the Israelites, Moses’ successor. |
|
| πλείονας | more |
|
Parse: Adjective, Accusative Masculine Plural, Comparative Root: πολύς Sense: greater in quantity. |
|
| μαθητὰς | disciples |
|
Parse: Noun, Accusative Masculine Plural Root: μαθητής Sense: a learner, pupil, disciple. |
|
| ποιεῖ | makes |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Indicative Active, 3rd Person Singular Root: ποιέω Sense: to make. |
|
| βαπτίζει | baptizes |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Indicative Active, 3rd Person Singular Root: βαπτίζω Sense: to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk). |
|
| ἢ | than |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: ἤ Sense: either, or, than. |
|
| Ἰωάννης | John |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Ἰωάννης Sense: John the Baptist was the son of Zacharias and Elisabeth, the forerunner of Christ. |
|
Greek Commentary for John 4:1
Reference to John 3:22. the work of the Baptist and the jealousy of his disciples. Ουν Oun is very common in John‘s Gospel in such transitions. The Lord So the best manuscripts (Neutral Alexandrian), though the Western class has ο Ιησους ho Iēsous Mark usually has ο Ιησους ho Iēsous and Luke often ο Κυριος ho Kurios In the narrative portion of John we have usually ο Ιησους ho Iēsous but ο Κυριος ho Kurios in five passages (John 4:1; John 6:23; John 11:2; John 20:20; John 21:12). There is no reason why John should not apply ο Κυριος ho Kurios to Jesus in the narrative sections as well as Luke. Bernard argues that these are “explanatory glosses,” not in the first draft of the Gospel. But why? When John wrote his Gospel he certainly held Jesus to be Κυριος Kurios (Lord) as Luke did earlier when he wrote both Gospel and Acts This is hypercriticism. Knew Second aorist active indicative of γινωσκω ginōskō The Pharisees knew this obvious fact. It was easy for Jesus to know the attitude of the Pharisees about it (John 2:24). Already the Pharisees are suspicious of Jesus. How that Declarative οτι hoti (indirect assertion). Was making and baptizing more disciples than John Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John‘s early ministry (Mark 1:5; Matthew 3:5; Luke 3:7, Luke 3:15) in order to see the significance of this statement that Jesus had forged ahead of him in popular favour. Already the Pharisees had turned violently against John who had called them broods of vipers. It is most likely that they drew John out about the marriage of Herod Antipas and got him involved directly with the tetrarch so as to have him cast into prison (Luke 3:19.). Josephus (Ant. XVIII. v. 2) gives a public reason for this act of Herod Antipas, the fear that John would “raise a rebellion,” probably the public reason for his private vengeance as given by Luke. Apparently John was cast into prison, though recently still free (John 3:24), before Jesus left for Galilee. The Pharisees, with John out of the way, turn to Jesus with envy and hate. [source]
Pointing back to John 3:22, and the controversy which arose about the two baptisms. [source]
See on Matthew 21:3. [source]
Or perceived. See on John 2:24. [source]
John never alludes to the Sadducees by name. The Pharisees represented the opposition to Jesus, the most powerful and dangerous of the Jewish sects. [source]
Both verbs are in the present tense. The narrator puts himself at the scene of the story: is making and baptizing. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for John 4:1
There were false prophets in the time of the Old Testament prophets. Jesus will predict “false Messiahs and false prophets” (Matthew 24:24) who will lead many astray. They came in due time posing as angels of light like Satan, Judaizers (2 Corinthians 11:13.) and Gnostics (1 John 4:1; 1 Timothy 4:1). Already false prophets were on hand when Jesus spoke on this occasion (cf. Acts 13:6; 2 Peter 2:1). In outward appearance they look like sheep in the sheep‘s clothing which they wear, but within they are “ravening wolves” (λυκοι αρπαγες lukoi harpages), greedy for power, gain, self. It is a tragedy that such men and women reappear through the ages and always find victims. Wolves are more dangerous than dogs and hogs. [source]
Here Mark begins the narrative of the active ministry of Jesus and he is followed by Matthew and Luke. Mark undoubtedly follows the preaching of Peter. But for the Fourth Gospel we should not know of the year of work in various parts of the land (Perea, Galilee, Judea, Samaria) preceding the Galilean ministry. John supplements the Synoptic Gospels at this point as often. The arrest of John had much to do with the departure of Jesus from Judea to Galilee (John 4:1-4). [source]
Luke sometimes has ην διδασκων autos in the nominative as unemphatic “he” as here, not “he himself.”Was teaching (ησαν κατημενοι ēn didaskōn). Periphrastic imperfect again like our English idiom.Were sitting by Periphrastic imperfect again. There is no “by” in the Greek.Doctors of the law (ιεροδιδασκαλος nomodidaskaloi). A compound word formed after analogy of γραμματεις hierodidaskalos but not found outside of the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, one of the very few words apparently N.T. in usage. It appears here and Acts 5:34; 1 Timothy 1:7. It is not likely that Luke and Paul made the word, but they simply used the term already in current use to describe teachers and interpreters of the law. Our word “doctor” is Latin for “teacher.” These “teachers of the law” are called elsewhere in the Gospels “scribes” (νομικος grammateis) as in Matthew and Mark (See note on Matthew 5:20; Matthew 23:34) and Luke 5:21; Luke 19:47; Luke 21:1; Luke 22:2. Luke also employs νομος nomikos (one skilled in the law, οι γραμματεις και οι Παρισαιοι nomos) as in Luke 10:25. One thinks of our LL.D. (Doctors of Civil and Canon Law), for both were combined in Jewish law. They were usually Pharisees (mentioned here for the first time in Luke) for which see note on Matthew 3:7, note on Matthew 5:20. Luke will often speak of the Pharisees hereafter. Not all the “Pharisees” were “teachers of the law” so that both terms often occur together as in Luke 5:21 where Luke has separate articles (οι ησαν εληλυτοτες hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi), distinguishing between them, though one article may occur as in Matthew 5:20 or no article as here in Matthew 5:17. Luke alone mentions the presence here of these Pharisees and doctors of the law “which were come” (εκ πασης κωμης της Γαλιλαιας και Ιουδαιας και Ιερουσαλημ hoi ēsan elēluthotes periphrastic past perfect active, had come).Out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem Edersheim (Jewish Social Life) observes that the Jews distinguished Jerusalem as a separate district in Judea. Plummer considers it hyperbole in Luke to use “every village.” But one must recall that Jesus had already made one tour of Galilee which stirred the Pharisees and rabbis to active opposition. Judea had already been aroused and Jerusalem was the headquarters of the definite campaign now organized against Jesus. One must bear in mind that John 4:1-4 shows that Jesus had already left Jerusalem and Judea because of the jealousy of the Pharisees. They are here on purpose to find fault and to make charges against Jesus. One must not forget that there were many kinds of Pharisees and that not all of them were as bad as these legalistic and punctilious hypocrites who deserved the indictment and exposure of Christ in Matthew 23. Paul himself is a specimen of the finer type of Pharisee which, however, developed into the persecuting fanatic till Jesus changed his whole life.The power of the Lord was with him to heal (Κυριου dunamis Kuriou ēn eis to iāsthai auton). So the best texts. It is neat Greek, but awkward English: “Then was the power of the Lord for the healing as to him (Jesus).” Here δυναμεις Kuriou refers to Jehovah.Dunamis (dynamite) is one of the common words for “miracles” What Luke means is that Jesus had the power of the Lord God to heal with. He does not mean that this power was intermittent. He simply calls attention to its presence with Jesus on this occasion. [source]
Edersheim (Jewish Social Life) observes that the Jews distinguished Jerusalem as a separate district in Judea. Plummer considers it hyperbole in Luke to use “every village.” But one must recall that Jesus had already made one tour of Galilee which stirred the Pharisees and rabbis to active opposition. Judea had already been aroused and Jerusalem was the headquarters of the definite campaign now organized against Jesus. One must bear in mind that John 4:1-4 shows that Jesus had already left Jerusalem and Judea because of the jealousy of the Pharisees. They are here on purpose to find fault and to make charges against Jesus. One must not forget that there were many kinds of Pharisees and that not all of them were as bad as these legalistic and punctilious hypocrites who deserved the indictment and exposure of Christ in Matthew 23. Paul himself is a specimen of the finer type of Pharisee which, however, developed into the persecuting fanatic till Jesus changed his whole life.The power of the Lord was with him to heal (Κυριου dunamis Kuriou ēn eis to iāsthai auton). So the best texts. It is neat Greek, but awkward English: “Then was the power of the Lord for the healing as to him (Jesus).” Here δυναμεις Kuriou refers to Jehovah.Dunamis (dynamite) is one of the common words for “miracles” What Luke means is that Jesus had the power of the Lord God to heal with. He does not mean that this power was intermittent. He simply calls attention to its presence with Jesus on this occasion. [source]
Periphrastic imperfect again. There is no “by” in the Greek.Doctors of the law (ιεροδιδασκαλος nomodidaskaloi). A compound word formed after analogy of γραμματεις hierodidaskalos but not found outside of the N.T. and ecclesiastical writers, one of the very few words apparently N.T. in usage. It appears here and Acts 5:34; 1 Timothy 1:7. It is not likely that Luke and Paul made the word, but they simply used the term already in current use to describe teachers and interpreters of the law. Our word “doctor” is Latin for “teacher.” These “teachers of the law” are called elsewhere in the Gospels “scribes” (νομικος grammateis) as in Matthew and Mark (See note on Matthew 5:20; Matthew 23:34) and Luke 5:21; Luke 19:47; Luke 21:1; Luke 22:2. Luke also employs νομος nomikos (one skilled in the law, οι γραμματεις και οι Παρισαιοι nomos) as in Luke 10:25. One thinks of our LL.D. (Doctors of Civil and Canon Law), for both were combined in Jewish law. They were usually Pharisees (mentioned here for the first time in Luke) for which see note on Matthew 3:7, note on Matthew 5:20. Luke will often speak of the Pharisees hereafter. Not all the “Pharisees” were “teachers of the law” so that both terms often occur together as in Luke 5:21 where Luke has separate articles (οι ησαν εληλυτοτες hoi grammateis kai hoi Pharisaioi), distinguishing between them, though one article may occur as in Matthew 5:20 or no article as here in Matthew 5:17. Luke alone mentions the presence here of these Pharisees and doctors of the law “which were come” (εκ πασης κωμης της Γαλιλαιας και Ιουδαιας και Ιερουσαλημ hoi ēsan elēluthotes periphrastic past perfect active, had come).Out of every village of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem Edersheim (Jewish Social Life) observes that the Jews distinguished Jerusalem as a separate district in Judea. Plummer considers it hyperbole in Luke to use “every village.” But one must recall that Jesus had already made one tour of Galilee which stirred the Pharisees and rabbis to active opposition. Judea had already been aroused and Jerusalem was the headquarters of the definite campaign now organized against Jesus. One must bear in mind that John 4:1-4 shows that Jesus had already left Jerusalem and Judea because of the jealousy of the Pharisees. They are here on purpose to find fault and to make charges against Jesus. One must not forget that there were many kinds of Pharisees and that not all of them were as bad as these legalistic and punctilious hypocrites who deserved the indictment and exposure of Christ in Matthew 23. Paul himself is a specimen of the finer type of Pharisee which, however, developed into the persecuting fanatic till Jesus changed his whole life.The power of the Lord was with him to heal (Κυριου dunamis Kuriou ēn eis to iāsthai auton). So the best texts. It is neat Greek, but awkward English: “Then was the power of the Lord for the healing as to him (Jesus).” Here δυναμεις Kuriou refers to Jehovah.Dunamis (dynamite) is one of the common words for “miracles” What Luke means is that Jesus had the power of the Lord God to heal with. He does not mean that this power was intermittent. He simply calls attention to its presence with Jesus on this occasion. [source]
Compare John 4:10. [source]
The word is often used in the Old Testament for the innermost part of a man, the soul or heart. See Job 15:35; Job 32:19; Proverbs 18:8; Proverbs 20:27, Proverbs 20:30. The rite of drawing and pouring out the water pointed back to the smitten rock in the desert. In Exodus 17:6, “there shall come water out of it,” is literally, “there shall come water from within him.” The word belly here means the inmost heart of the believer, which pours forth spiritual refreshment. Compare 1 Corinthians 10:4; John 4:14. [source]
Literally, have come to know. The order of the words believe and know is reversed in John 17:8; 1 John 4:16. In the case of the first disciples, faith, produced by the overpowering impression of Jesus' works and person, preceded intellectual conviction. [source]
John uses the word only here and 1 John 4:14. See on Jesus, Matthew 1:21. It is significant that this conception of Christ should have been first expressed by a Samaritan. [source]
This is explained either, which shall not perish but endure unto eternal life, or into life eternal, as into a granary. Compare John 4:14. [source]
Better, as Rev., accomplish. Not merely bring to an end, but perfect. From τέλειος , perfect. The verb is characteristic of John, and of the Epistle to the Hebrews. See John 5:36; John 17:4; John 19:28; 1 John 2:5; 1 John 4:12; Hebrews 2:10; Hebrews 5:9, etc. [source]
So Rev. The A.V. renders the two expressions in the same way, but there is a difference in the pronouns, indicated, though very vaguely, by every one that and whosoever, besides a more striking difference in the verb drinketh. In the former case, the article with the participle indicates something habitual; every one that drinks repeatedly, as men ordinarily do on the recurrence of their thirst. In John 4:14the definite aorist tense expresses a single act - something done once for all. Literally, he who may have drunk. [source]
From ἄντλος , the hold of a ship where the bilge-water settles, and hence, the bilge-water itself. The verb, therefore, originally, means to bale out bilge-water; thence, generally, to draw, as from a well (John 4:15). Canon Westcott thinks that the water which was changed into wine was not taken from the vessels of purification, but that the servants were bidden, after they had filled the vessels with water, to continue drawing from the well or spring. [source]
Strictly, spring. The word for cistern or well is φρέαρ , which John uses at John 4:11, John 4:12. Elsewhere in the New Testament always of a pit. See Luke 14:5; Revelation 9:1, Revelation 9:2. There is no mention of Jacob's Well in the Old Testament. The traditional well still remains. “At the mouth of the valley of Schechem two slight breaks are visible in the midst of the vast plain of corn - one a white Mussulman chapel; the other a few fragments of stone. The first of these covers the alleged tomb of Joseph, … the second marks the undisputed site of the well, now neglected and choked up by the ruins which have fallen into it; but still with every claim to be considered the original well” (Stanley, “Sinai and Palestine”). Dr. Thomson says: “I could see nothing like a well - nothing but a low, modern wall, much broken down, and never, apparently, more than ten feet high. The area enclosed by it is fifty-six paces from east to west, and sixty-five from north to south. The surface is covered by a confused mass of shapeless rubbish, overgrown with weeds and nettles … . The well is near the southeastern corner of the area, and, to reach the mouth of it, one must let himself down, with some risk, about ten feet into a low vault” (“Land and Book”). Dr. Thomson also remarks upon the great discrepancy in the measurements of the well by different tourists, owing to the accumulations of stones and debris from the ruins of the buildings which formerly covered it. “All confirm the saying of the Samaritan woman that 'the well is deep.'” Maundrell, in 1697, makes the depth one hundred and five feet, with fifteen feet of water. Mr. Calhoun, in 1838, found nearly the same depth of water. Dr. Wilson, in 1841, found the depth only seventy-five feet, which is confirmed by the later measurements of Captain Anderson in 1866, and of Lieutenant Conder in 1875. [source]
For assigns the reason why Jesus went into Galilee. By His own country, Judaea seems to be meant, though almost the same phrase, His country, is used by the three Synoptists of Nazareth in Galilee. John's Gospel, however, deals with the Judaean rather than with the Galilean ministry of Jesus, and the phrase, His own country, is appropriate to Judaea as “the true home and fatherland of the prophets, the land which contained the city of Messiah's birth, the city associated with Him alike in ancient prophecy and in popular expectation.” Hence, at Jerusalem, the people said, “Hath not the Scriptures said that Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was” (John 7:42)? In John 4:1-3it is stated that Jesus left Judaea because of a controversy excited by the Pharisees, whom John always marks as the leaders of the opposition to Jesus. Further, we are told that at Jerusalem, though many believed on His name, yet Jesus did not trust them (John 2:23, John 2:24). According to this explanation, γὰρ , for is used in its natural and most obvious sense as assigning the reason for Christ's departure into Galilee. The proverb is naturally suggested by the reference to Galilee, where Jesus had used it at Nazareth (see Matthew 13:57). The ὅτε οὖν whenthen (then indicating logical sequence and not time) of John 4:45follows naturally upon the citation of the proverb, signifying a correspondence between the character of His reception in Galilee and the motive of His going thither. Finally, if we understand by His own country, Nazareth, we are compelled to explain γὰρ , for, from John 4:46; Jesus went to Cana (north of Nazareth) without passing through His native place, for the reason mentioned. This seems forced and arbitrary. [source]
Literally, in this. Compare 1 John 2:3, 1 John 2:5; 1 John 3:16, 1 John 3:19, 1 John 3:24; 1 John 4:9, 1 John 4:10, 1 John 4:13, 1 John 4:17; 1 John 5:2. [source]
This form of expression occurs frequently in the New Testament, to denote the possession or experience of virtues, sensations, desires, emotions, intellectual or spiritual faculties, faults, or defects. It is stronger than the verb which expresses any one of these. For instance, to have faith is stronger than to believe: to have life, than the act of living. It expresses a distinct, personal realization of the virtue or fault or sentiment in question. Hence, to have sorrow is more than to be sorrowful. In Matthew 17:20, Christ does not say if ye believe, but if ye have faith; if faith, in ever so small a degree, is possessed by you as a conscious, living principle and motive. Compare have love (John 13:35; 1 John 4:16); have peace (John 16:33); have trust (2 Corinthians 3:4); have boldness (Hebrews 10:19; 1 John 2:28). [source]
Commonly referred to what follows. My Father is glorified in this, namely, that ye bear much fruit. It is better to refer it back to John 15:7. In the perfect unity of will between the Son and the disciple, which results in the disciple's obtaining whatever he asks, the Father is glorified. To this effect is John 14:13, “Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.” The design of this glorification is that ( ἴνα ) you may bear much fruit. This retrospective reference of ἐν τούτῳ , in this, or herein, occurs in John 4:37; John 16:30; 1 John 4:17. [source]
Setting the Advocate distinctly and sharply before the hearers. The pronoun is used in John's First Epistle, distinctively of our Lord. See 1 John 2:6; 1 John 3:3, 1 John 3:5, 1 John 3:7, 1 John 3:16; 1 John 4:17. [source]
The verb means to owe. It occurs several times in John's Epistles (1 John 2:6; 1 John 3:16; 1 John 4:11; 3 John 1:8). In the Gospel only here and John 19:7. Compare Luke 17:10. In Matthew's version of the Lord's prayer occur the two kindred words ὀφείλνμα , debt, and ὀφειλέτης , debtor. Jesus here puts the obligation to ministry as a debt under which His disciples are laid by His ministry to them. The word ought is the past tense of owe. Δεῖ , ought or must (see John 3:7, John 3:14, John 3:30, etc.) expresses an obligation in the nature of things; ὀφείλειν , a special, personal obligation. [source]
The present tense. Literally, they saw where he dwelleth. For a similar construction see John 2:9; John 4:1; Acts 10:18, etc. [source]
The best texts add οὖν , therefore. So Rev. This connecting particle is found in John's Gospel as often as in the other three combined, and most commonly in narrative, marking the transition from one thing to another, and serving to connect the several parts of the narrative. See John 1:22; John 2:18; John 3:25; John 4:28, John 4:30, etc. Much more frequently thus than in the discourses, where it would be used to mark a sequence of thought. Still such instances occur, as John 4:21, John 4:25; John 3:29; John 8:5; John 4:11. [source]
Interpretations differ. The rendering of the A.V. and Rev. is of doubtful authority. The passages cited in support of this, Matthew 10:22; Matthew 24:13; Mark 13:13, may all be rendered to the uttermost. Morever, other formulas are used where the meaning to the end is unquestionable. In Revelation 2:26, the only other instance in John's writings where τέλος is used in an adverbial phrase the expression is ἄχρι τέλους , unto the end. Similarly Hebrews 6:11. In Hebrews 3:6, Hebrews 3:14, μέχρι τὲλους , unto the end. The phrase may mean at last, and so is rendered by many here, as Meyer, Lange, Thayer (Lex.). “At last He loved them;” that is, showed them the last proof of His love. This is the most probable rendering in Luke 18:5, on which see note. It may also mean to the uttermost, completely. So Westcott and Godet. But I am inclined, with Meyer, to shrink from the “inappropriate gradation” which is thus implied, as though Jesus' love now reached a higher degree than before ( ἀγαπήσας ). Hence I prefer the rendering at last, or finally He loved them, taking ἠγάπησεν , loved, in the sense of the manifestation of His love. This sense frequently attaches to the verb. See, for instance, 1 John 4:10(“love viewed in its historic manifestation” Westcott), and compare John 3:16; Ephesians 2:4; Ephesians 5:2, Ephesians 5:25; 2 Thessalonians 2:16; Revelation 3:9. [source]
Revised version of the New Testament, more correctly, for witness: a witness would be, μάρτυρα as Acts 1:8. The sense is for witness-bearing or to bear witness. On the word, see Acts 1:22; 1 Peter 5:1. It is one of John's characteristic words, occurring nearly fifty times in various forms in his Gospel, and thirty or forty times in the Epistles and Revelation. The emphatic development of the idea of witness is peculiar to this Gospel. “It evidently belongs to a time when men had begun to reason about the faith, and to analyze the grounds on which it rested” (Westcott). He develops the idea under the following forms: The witness of the Father (John 5:31, John 5:34, John 5:37); the witness of Christ himself (John 8:14; John 18:37); the witness of works (John 5:17, John 5:36; John 10:25; John 14:11; John 15:24); the witness of Scripture (John 5:39, John 5:40, John 5:46; John 1:46); the witness of the forerunner (John 1:7; John 5:33, John 5:35); the witness of the disciples (John 15:27; John 19:35; John 21:24; 1 John 1:2; 1 John 4:14); the witness of the Spirit (John 15:26; John 16:13, John 16:14; 1 John 5:6). Note the emphasis attached to the idea here, by the twofold form in which it is put: first, generally, for witness, and then by giving the subject of the testimony. [source]
Three words are used in the New Testament for man: ἄῤῥην , or ἄρσην , ἀνήρ , and ἄνθρωπος . Ἄρσην marks merely the sexual distinction, male (Romans 1:27; Revelation 12:5, Revelation 12:13). Ἁνήρ denotes the man as distinguished from the woman, as male or as a husband (Acts 8:12; Matthew 1:16), or from a boy (Matthew 14:21). Also man as endowed with courage, intelligence, strength, and other noble attributes (1 Corinthians 13:11; Ephesians 4:13; James 3:2). Ἄνθρωπος is generic, without distinction of sex, a human being (John 16:21), though often used in connections which indicate or imply sex, as Matthew 19:10; Matthew 10:35. Used of mankind (Matthew 4:4), or of the people (Matthew 5:13, Matthew 5:16; Matthew 6:5, Matthew 6:18; John 6:10). Of man as distinguished from animals or plants (Matthew 4:19; 2 Peter 2:16), and from God, Christ as divine and angels (Matthew 10:32; John 4:16-189; Luke 2:15). With the notion of weakness leading to sin, and with a contemptuous sense (1 Corinthians 2:5; 1 Peter 4:2; John 5:12; Romans 9:20). The more honorable and noble sense thus attaches to ἀνήρ rather than to ἄνθρωπος . Thus Herodotus says that when the Medes charged the Greeks, they fell in vast numbers, so that it was manifest to Xerxes that he had many men combatants ( ἄνθρωποι ) but few warriors ( ἄνθρωποι ) vii., 210. So Homer: “O friends, be men ( ἀνέρες ), and take on a stout heart” (“Iliad,” v., 529). Ἁνήρ is therefore used here of Jesus by the Baptist with a sense of dignity. Compare ἄνθρωπος , in John 1:6, where the word implies no disparagement, but is simply indefinite. In John ἀνήρ has mostly the sense of husband (1713610853_58). See John 6:10. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
This is connected with the main subject of the sentence: “The Word - full of grace and truth.” A common combination in the Old Testament (see Genesis 24:27, Genesis 24:49; Genesis 32:10; Exodus 34:6; Psalm 40:10, Psalm 40:11; Psalm 61:7). In these two words the character of the divine revelation is summed up. “Grace corresponds with the idea of the revelation of God as Love (1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16) by Him who is Life; and Truth with that of the revelation of God as Light (1 John 1:5) by Him who is Himself Light” (Westcott). Compare John 1:17. On Grace, see on Luke 1:30. [source]
Compare Luke 9:32; 2 Peter 2:16; 1 John 1:1; 1 John 4:14. See on Matthew 11:7; see on Matthew 23:5. The word denotes calm, continuous contemplation of an object which remains before the spectator. [source]
Logos. This expression is the keynote and theme of the entire gospel. Λόγος is from the root λεγ , appearing in λέγω , the primitive meaning of which is to lay: then, to pick out, gather, pick up: hence to gather or put words together, and so, to speak. Hence λόγος is, first of all, a collecting or collection both of things in the mind, and of words by which they are expressed. It therefore signifies both the outward form by which the inward thought is expressed, and the inward thought itself, the Latin oratio and ratio: compare the Italian ragionare, “to think” and “to speak.” As signifying the outward form it is never used in the merely grammatical sense, as simply the name of a thing or act ( ἔπος, ὄνομα, ῥῆμα ), but means a word as the thing referred to: the material, not the formal part: a word as embodying a conception or idea. See, for instance, Matthew 22:46; 1 Corinthians 14:9, 1 Corinthians 14:19. Hence it signifies a saying, of God, or of man (Matthew 19:21, Matthew 19:22; Mark 5:35, Mark 5:36): a decree, a precept (Romans 9:28; Mark 7:13). The ten commandments are called in the Septuagint, οἱ δέκα λόγοι , “the ten words ” (Exodus 34:28), and hence the familiar term decalogue. It is further used of discourse: either of the act of speaking (Acts 14:12), of skill and practice in speaking (Acts 18:15; 2 Timothy 4:15), specifically the doctrine of salvation through Christ (Matthew 13:20-23; Philemon 1:14); of narrative, both the relation and the thing related (Acts 1:1; John 21:23; Mark 1:45); of matter under discussion, an affair, a case in law (Acts 15:6; Acts 19:38). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- As signifying the inward thought, it denotes the faculty of thinking and reasoning (Hebrews 4:12); regard or consideration (Acts 20:24); reckoning, account (Philemon 4:15, Philemon 4:17; Hebrews 4:13); cause or reason (Acts 10:29). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- John uses the word in a peculiar sense, here, and in John 1:14; and, in this sense, in these two passages only. The nearest approach to it is in Revelation 19:13, where the conqueror is called the Word of God; and it is recalled in the phrases Word of Life, and the Life was manifested (1 John 1:1, 1 John 1:2). Compare Hebrews 4:12. It was a familiar and current theological term when John wrote, and therefore he uses it without explanation. Old Testament Usage of the TermThe word here points directly to Psalm href="/desk/?q=ps+33:6&sr=1">Psalm 33:6). The idea of God, who is in his own nature hidden, revealing himself in creation, is the root of the Logos-idea, in contrast with all materialistic or pantheistic conceptions of creation. This idea develops itself in the Old Testament on three lines. (1) The Word, as embodying the divine will, is personified in Hebrew poetry. Consequently divine attributes are predicated of it as being the continuous revelation of God in law and prophecy (Psalm 3:4; Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 119:105). The Word is a healer in Psalm 107:20; a messenger in Psalm 147:15; the agent of the divine decrees in Isaiah 55:11. (2) The personified wisdom (Job 28:12sq.; Job 28). Even Death, which unlocks so many secrets, and the underworld, know it only as a rumor (Job href="/desk/?q=job+28:22&sr=1">Job 28:22). It is only God who knows its way and its place (Job 28:23). He made the world, made the winds and the waters, made a decree for the rain and a way for the lightning of the thunder (Job 28:25, Job 28:26). He who possessed wisdom in the beginning of his way, before His works of old, before the earth with its depths and springs and mountains, with whom was wisdom as one brought up with Him (Proverbs 8:26-31), declared it. “It became, as it were, objective, so that He beheld it” (Job 28:27) and embodied it in His creative work. This personification, therefore, is based on the thought that wisdom is not shut up at rest in God, but is active and manifest in the world. “She standeth in the top of high places, by the way in the places of the paths. She crieth at the gates, at the entry of the city, at the coming in at the doors” (Proverbs 8:2, Proverbs 8:3). She builds a palace and prepares a banquet, and issues a general invitation to the simple and to him that wanteth understanding (Proverbs 9:1-6). It is viewed as the one guide to salvation, comprehending all revelations of God, and as an attribute embracing and combining all His other attributes. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (3) The Angel of Jehovah. The messenger of God who serves as His agent in the world of sense, and is sometimes distinguished from Jehovah and sometimes identical with him (Genesis 16:7-13; Genesis 32:24-28; Hosea 12:4, Hosea 12:5; Exodus 23:20, Exodus 23:21; Malachi 3:1). Apocryphal UsageIn the Apocryphal writings this mediative element is more distinctly apprehended, but with a tendency to pantheism. In the Wisdom of Solomon (at least 100 b.c.), where wisdom seems to be viewed as another name for the whole divine nature, while nowhere connected with the Messiah, it is described as a being of light, proceeding essentially from God; a true image of God, co-occupant of the divine throne; a real and independent principle, revealing God in the world and mediating between it and Him, after having created it as his organ - in association with a spirit which is called μονογενές , only begotten (7:22). “She is the breath of the power of God, and a pure influence flowing from the glory of the Almighty; therefore can no defiled thing fall into her. For she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of his goodness” (see chapter 7, throughout). Again: “Wisdom reacheth from one end to another mightily, and sweetly doth she order all things. In that she is conversant with God, she magnifieth her nobility: yea, the Lord of all things Himself loved her. For she is privy to the mysteries of the knowledge of God, and a lover of His works. Moreover, by the means of her I shall obtain immortality, and leave behind me an everlasting memorial to them that come after me” (chapter 9). In 16:12, it is said, “Thy word, O Lord, healeth all things” (compare Psalm 107:20); and in 18:15,16, “Thine almighty word leaped from heaven out of thy royal throne, as a fierce man of war into the midst of a land of destruction, and brought thine unfeigned commandment as a sharp sword, and, standing up, filled all things with death; and it touched the heaven, but it stood upon the earth.” See also Wisdom of Sirach, chapters 1,24, and Genesis href="/desk/?q=ge+39:21&sr=1">Genesis 39:21, they paraphrase, “The Memra was with Joseph in prison.” In Psalm 110:1-7Jehovah addresses the first verse to the Memra. The Memra is the angel that destroyed the first-born of Egypt, and it was the Memra that led the Israelites in the cloudy pillar. Usage in the Judaeo-Alexandrine PhilosophyFrom the time of Ptolemy I: (323-285 b.c.), there were Jews in great numbers in Egypt. Philo (a.d. 50) estimates them at a million in his time. Alexandria was their headquarters. They had their own senate and magistrates, and possessed the same privileges as the Greeks. The Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek (b.c. 280-150) was the beginning of a literary movement among them, the key-note of which was the reconciliation of Western culture and Judaism, the establishment of a connection between the Old Testament faith and the Greek philosophy. Hence they interpreted the facts of sacred history allegorically, and made them symbols of certain speculative principles, alleging that the Greek philosophers had borrowed their wisdom from Moses. Aristobulus (about 150 b.c.) asserted the existence of a previous and much older translation of the law, and dedicated to Ptolemy VI an allegorical exposition of the Pentateuch, in which he tried to show that the doctrines of the Peripatetic or Aristotelian school were derived from the Old Testament. Most of the schools of Greek philosophy were represented among the Alexandrian Jews, but the favorite one was the Platonic. The effort at reconciliation culminated in Philo, a contemporary of Christ. Philo was intimately acquainted with the Platonic philosophy, and made it the fundamental feature of his own doctrines, while availing himself likewise of ideas belonging to the Peripatetic and Stoic schools. Unable to discern the difference in the points of view from which these different doctrines severally proceeded, he jumbled together not merely discordant doctrines of the Greek schools, but also those of the East, regarding the wisdom of the Greeks as having originated in the legislation and writings of Moses. He gathered together from East and West every element that could help to shape his conception of a vicegerent of God, “a mediator between the eternal and the ephemeral. His Logos reflects light from countless facets.” According to Philo, God is the absolute Being. He calls God “that which is:” “the One and the All.” God alone exists for himself, without multiplicity and without mixture. No name can properly be ascribed to Him: He simply is. Hence, in His nature, He is unknowable. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Outside of God there exists eternal matter, without form and void, and essentially evil; but the perfect Being could not come into direct contact with the senseless and corruptible; so that the world could not have been created by His direct agency. Hence the doctrine of a mediating principle between God and matter - the divine Reason, the Logos in whom are comprised all the ideas of finite things, and who created the sensible world by causing these ideas to penetrate into matter. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The absolute God is surrounded by his powers ( δυνάμεις ) as a king by his servants. These powers are, in Platonic language, ideas; in Jewish, angels; but all are essentially one, and their unity, as they exist in God, as they emanate from him, as they are disseminated in the world, is expressed by Logos Hence the Logos appears under a twofold aspect: (1) As the immanent reason of God, containing within itself the world-ideal, which, while not outwardly existing, is like the immanent reason in man. This is styled Λόγος ἐνδιάθετος , i.e., the Logos conceived and residing in the mind. This was the aspect emphasized by the Alexandrians, and which tended to the recognition of a twofold personality in the divine essence. (2) As the outspoken word, proceeding from God and manifest in the world. This, when it has issued from God in creating the world, is the Λόγος προφορικός , i.e., the Logos uttered, even as in man the spoken word is the manifestation of thought. This aspect prevailed in Palestine, where the Word appears like the angel of the Pentateuch, as the medium of the outward communication of God with men, and tends toward the recognition of a divine person subordinate to God. Under the former aspect, the Logos is, really, one with God's hidden being: the latter comprehends all the workings and revelations of God in the world; affords from itself the ideas and energies by which the world was framed and is upheld; and, filling all things with divine light and life, rules them in wisdom, love, and righteousness. It is the beginning of creation, not inaugurated, like God, nor made, like the world; but the eldest son of the eternal Father (the world being the younger); God's image; the mediator between God and the world; the highest angel; the second God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Philo's conception of the Logos, therefore, is: the sum-total and free exercise of the divine energies; so that God, so far as he reveals himself, is called Logos; while the Logos, so far as he reveals God, is called God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- John's doctrine and terms are colored by these preceding influences. During his residence at Ephesus he must have become familiar with the forms and terms of the Alexandrian theology. Nor is it improbable that he used the term Logos with an intent to facilitate the passage from the current theories of his time to the pure gospel which he proclaimed. “To those Hellenists and Hellenistic Jews, on the one hand, who were vainly philosophizing on the relations of the finite and infinite; to those investigators of the letter of the Scriptures, on the other, who speculated about the theocratic revelations, John said, by giving this name Logos to Jesus: 'The unknown Mediator between God and the world, the knowledge of whom you are striving after, we have seen, heard, and touched. Your philosophical speculations and your scriptural subtleties will never raise you to Him. Believe as we do in Jesus, and you will possess in Him that divine Revealer who engages your thoughts'” (Godet). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- But John's doctrine is not Philo's, and does not depend upon it. The differences between the two are pronounced. Though both use the term Logos, they use it with utterly different meanings. In John it signifies word, as in Holy Scripture generally; in Philo, reason; and that so distinctly that when Philo wishes to give it the meaning of word, he adds to it by way of explanation, the term ῥῆμα , word. The nature of the being described by Logos is conceived by each in an entirely different spirit. John's Logos is a person, with a consciousness of personal distinction; Philo's is impersonal. His notion is indeterminate and fluctuating, shaped by the influence which happens to be operating at the time. Under the influence of Jewish documents he styles the Logos an “archangel;” under the influence of Plato, “the Idea of Ideas;” of the Stoics, “the impersonal Reason.” It is doubtful whether Philo ever meant to represent the Logos formally as a person. All the titles he gives it may be explained by supposing it to mean the ideal world on which the actual is modeled. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In Philo, moreover, the function of the Logos is confined to the creation and preservation of the universe. He does not identify or connect him with the Messiah. His doctrine was, to a great degree, a philosophical substitute for Messianic hopes. He may have conceived of the Word as acting through the Messiah, but not as one with him. He is a universal principle. In John the Messiah is the Logos himself, uniting himself with humanity, and clothing himself with a body in order to save the world. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The two notions differ as to origin. The impersonal God of Philo cannot pass to the finite creation without contamination of his divine essence. Hence an inferior agent must be interposed. John's God, on the other hand, is personal, and a loving personality. He is a Father (John 1:18); His essence is love (John 3:16; 1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16). He is in direct relation with the world which He desires to save, and the Logos is He Himself, manifest in the flesh. According to Philo, the Logos is not coexistent with the eternal God. Eternal matter is before him in time. According to John, the Logos is essentially with the Father from all eternity (John 1:2), and it is He who creates all things, matter included (John 1:3). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Philo misses the moral energy of the Hebrew religion as expressed in its emphasis upon the holiness of Jehovah, and therefore fails to perceive the necessity of a divine teacher and Savior. He forgets the wide distinction between God and the world, and declares that, were the universe to end, God would die of loneliness and inactivity. The Meaning of Logos in JohnAs Logos has the double meaning of thought and speech, so Christ is related to God as the word to the idea, the word being not merely a name for the idea, but the idea itself expressed. The thought is the inward word (Dr. Schaff compares the Hebrew expression “I speak in my heart” for “I think”). The Logos of John is the real, personal God (John 1:1), the Word, who was originally before the creation with God. and was God, one in essence and nature, yet personally distinct (John 1:1, John 1:18); the revealer and interpreter of the hidden being of God; the reflection and visible image of God, and the organ of all His manifestations to the world. Compare Hebrews 1:3. He made all things, proceeding personally from God for the accomplishment of the act of creation (Hebrews 1:3), and became man in the person of Jesus Christ, accomplishing the redemption of the world. Compare Philemon 2:6. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The following is from William Austin, “Meditation for Christmas Day,” cited by Ford on John:-DIVIDER- “The name Word is most excellently given to our Savior; for it expresses His nature in one, more than in any others. Therefore St. John, when he names the Person in the Trinity (1 John 5:7), chooses rather to call Him Word than Son; for word is a phrase more communicable than son. Son hath only reference to the Father that begot Him; but word may refer to him that conceives it; to him that speaks it; to that which is spoken by it; to the voice that it is clad in; and to the effects it raises in him that hears it. So Christ, as He is the Word, not only refers to His Father that begot Him, and from whom He comes forth, but to all the creatures that were made by Him; to the flesh that He took to clothe Him; and to the doctrine He brought and taught, and, which lives yet in the hearts of all them that obediently do hear it. He it is that is this Word; and any other, prophet or preacher, he is but a voice (Luke 3:4). Word is an inward conception of the mind; and voice is but a sign of intention. St. John was but a sign, a voice; not worthy to untie the shoe-latchet of this Word. Christ is the inner conception 'in the bosom of His Father;' and that is properly the Word. And yet the Word is the intention uttered forth, as well as conceived within; for Christ was no less the Word in the womb of the Virgin, or in the cradle of the manger, or on the altar of the cross, than he was in the beginning, 'in the bosom of his Father.' For as the intention departs not from the mind when the word is uttered, so Christ, proceeding from the Father by eternal generation, and after here by birth and incarnation, remains still in Him and with Him in essence; as the intention, which is conceived and born in the mind, remains still with it and in it, though the word be spoken. He is therefore rightly called the Word, both by His coming from, and yet remaining still in, the Father.”And the WordA repetition of the great subject, with solemn emphasis.Was with God ( ἦν πὸς τὸν Θεὸν )Anglo-Saxon vers., mid Gode. Wyc., at God. With ( πρός ) does not convey the full meaning, that there is no single English word which will give it better. The preposition πρός , which, with the accusative case, denotes motion towards, or direction, is also often used in the New Testament in the sense of with; and that not merely as being near or beside, but as a living union and communion; implying the active notion of intercourse. Thus: “Are not his sisters here with us ” ( πρὸς ἡμᾶς ), i.e., in social relations with us (Mark 6:3; Matthew 13:56). “How long shall I be with you ” ( πρὸς ὑμᾶς , Mark 9:16). “I sat daily with you ” (Matthew 26:55). “To be present with the Lord ” ( πρὸς τὸν Κύριον , 2 Corinthians 5:8). “Abide and winter with you ” (1 Corinthians 16:6). “The eternal life which was with the Father ” ( πρὸς τὸν πατέρα , 1 John 1:2). Thus John's statement is that the divine Word not only abode with the Father from all eternity, but was in the living, active relation of communion with Him.And the Word was God ( καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος )In the Greek order, and God was the Word, which is followed by Anglo-Saxon, Wyc., and Tynd. But θεὸς , God, is the predicate and not the subject of the proposition. The subject must be the Word; for John is not trying to show who is God, but who is the Word. Notice that Θεὸς is without the article, which could not have been omitted if he had meant to designate the word as God; because, in that event, Θεὸς would have been ambiguous; perhaps a God. Moreover, if he had said God was the Word, he would have contradicted his previous statement by which he had distinguished (hypostatically) God from the word, and λόγος (Logos) would, further, have signified only an attribute of God. The predicate is emphatically placed in the proposition before the subject, because of the progress of the thought; this being the third and highest statement respecting the Word - the climax of the two preceding propositions. The word God, used attributively, maintains the personal distinction between God and the Word, but makes the unity of essence and nature to follow the distinction of person, and ascribes to the Word all the attributes of the divine essence. “There is something majestic in the way in which the description of the Logos, in the three brief but great propositions of John 1:1, is unfolded with increasing fullness” (Meyer). [source]
He was the fountain of life - physical, moral, and eternal - its principle and source. Two words for life are employed in the New Testament: βίος and ζωὴ . The primary distinction is that ζωὴ means existence as contrasted with death, and βίος , the period, means, or manner of existence. Hence βίος is originally the higher word, being used of men, while ζωὴ is used of animals ( ζῶα ). We speak therefore of the discussion of the life and habits of animals as zoo logy; and of accounts of men's lives as bio graphy. Animals have the vital principle in common with men, but men lead lives controlled by intellect and will, and directed to moral and intellectual ends. In the New Testament, βίος means either living, i.e., means of subsistence (Mark 12:44; Luke 8:43), or course of life, life regarded as an economy (Luke 8:14; 1 Timothy 2:2; 2 Timothy 2:4). Ζωὴ occurs in the lower sense of life, considered principally or wholly as existence (1 Peter 3:10; Acts 8:33; Acts 17:25; Hebrews 7:3). There seems to be a significance in the use of the word in Luke 16:25: “Thou in thy lifetime ( ἐν τῇ ζωῇ σου ) receivedst thy good things;” the intimation being that the rich man's life had been little better than mere existence, and not life at all in the true sense. But throughout the New Testament ζωὴ is the nobler word, seeming to have changed places with βίος . It expresses the sum of mortal and eternal blessedness (Matthew 25:46; Luke 18:30; John 11:25; Acts 2:28; Romans 5:17; Romans 6:4), and that not only in respect of men, but also of God and Christ. So here. Compare John 5:26; John 14:6; 1 John 1:2. This change is due to the gospel revelation of the essential connection of sin with death, and consequently, of life with holiness. “Whatever truly lives, does so because sin has never found place in it, or, having found place for a time, has since been overcome and expelled” (Trench). Ζωὴ is a favorite word with John. See John 11:25; John 14:6; John 8:12; 1 John 1:2; 1 John 5:20; John 6:35, John 6:48; John 6:63; Revelation 21:6; Revelation 22:1, Revelation 22:17; Revelation 7:17; John 4:14; Revelation 2:7; Revelation 22:2, Revelation 22:14, Revelation 22:19; John 12:50; John 17:3; John 20:31; John 5:26; John 6:53, John 6:54; John 5:40; John 3:15, John 3:16, John 3:36; John 10:10; John 5:24; John 12:25; John 6:27; John 4:36; 1 John 5:12, 1 John 5:16; John 6:51.Was the Light of men ( ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων )Passing from the thought of creation in general to that of mankind, who, in the whole range of created things, had a special capacity for receiving the divine. The Light - the peculiar mode of the divine operation upon men, conformably to their rational and moral nature which alone was fitted to receive the light of divine truth. It is not said that the Word was light, but that the life was the light. The Word becomes light through the medium of life, of spiritual life, just as sight is a function of physical life. Compare John 14:6, where Christ becomes the life through being the truth; and Matthew 5:8, where the pure heart is the medium through which God is beheld. In whatever mode of manifestation the Word is in the world, He is the light of the world; in His works, in the dawn of creation; in the happy conditions of Eden; in the Patriarchs, in the Law and the Prophets, in His incarnation, and in the subsequent history of the Church. Compare John 9:5. Of men, as a class, and not of individuals only. [source]
God is first in the Greek order, as emphatic: “God hath no man ever seen.” As to the substance of the statement, compare John 3:11; Exodus 33:20; 1 John 4:12. Manifestations of God to Old Testament saints were only partial and approximate (Exodus 33:23). The seeing intended here is seeing of the divine essence rather than of the divine person, which also is indicated by the absence of the article from Θεὸν , God. In this sense even Christ was not seen as God. The verb ὁράω , to see, denotes a physical act, but emphasizes the mental discernment accompanying it, and points to the result rather than to the act of vision. In 1 John 1:1; 1 John 4:12, 1 John 4:14, θεάομαι is used, denoting calm and deliberate contemplation (see on John 1:14). In John 12:45, we have θεωρέω , to behold (see on Mark 5:15; see on Luke 10:18). Both θεάομαι and θεωρέω imply deliberate contemplation, but the former is gazing with a view to satisfy the eye, while the latter is beholding more critically, with an inward spiritual or mental interest in the thing beheld, and with a view to acquire knowledge about it. “ Θεωρεῖν would be used of a general officially reviewing or inspecting an army; θεᾶσθαι of a lay spectator looking at the parade” (Thayer). [source]
“I speak not.” Christ did pray for the disciples before his death (John 14:16; John 17:9, John 17:15, John 17:24) and he prays also for sinners (Luke 23:34; 1 John 2:1). Here it is the special love of God for disciples of Jesus (John 14:21, John 14:23; John 17:23; 1 John 4:19). Note αιτεω aiteō and ερωταω erōtaō used in practically the same sense as in John 16:23. [source]
So it has to mean here in the mouth of the Samaritan woman, not Lord. Thou hast nothing to draw with and the well is deep This broken construction of ουτεκαι oute -Αντλημα kai (neither - and) occurs in N.T. elsewhere only in 3 John 1:10. αντλεω Antlēma (from πρεαρ antleō to draw) is a late word for that which is drawn, then (Plutarch) for the act of drawing, and then for the rope as here to draw with. This well “The water the living,” with the article referring to the language of Jesus in John 4:10. She is still thinking only of literal water. [source]
See John 1:3 for this verb and note its use for the historic event of the Incarnation rather than ην ēn of John 1:1. Note also the absence of the article with the predicate substantive σαρχ sarx so that it cannot mean “the flesh became the Word.” The Pre-existence of the Logos has already been plainly stated and argued. John does not here say that the Logos entered into a man or dwelt in a man or filled a man. One is at liberty to see an allusion to the birth narratives in Matthew 1:16-25; Luke 1:28-38, if he wishes, since John clearly had the Synoptics before him and chiefly supplemented them in his narrative. In fact, one is also at liberty to ask what intelligent meaning can one give to John‘s language here apart from the Virgin Birth? What ordinary mother or father ever speaks of a child “becoming flesh”? For the Incarnation see also 2 Corinthians 8:9; Galatians 4:4; Romans 1:3; Romans 8:3; Philemon 2:7.; 1 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 2:14. “To explain the exact significance of εγενετο egeneto in this sentence is beyond the powers of any interpreter” (Bernard). Unless, indeed, as seems plain, John is referring to the Virgin Birth as recorded in Matthew and Luke. “The Logos of philosophy is, John declares, the Jesus of history” (Bernard). Thus John asserts the deity and the real humanity of Christ. He answers the Docetic Gnostics who denied his humanity. Dwelt among us First aorist ingressive aorist active indicative of σκηνοω skēnoō old verb, to pitch one‘s tent or tabernacle First aorist middle indicative of τεαομαι theaomai (from τεα thea spectacle). The personal experience of John and of others who did recognize Jesus as the Shekinah glory John employs τεαομαι theaomai again in John 1:32 (the Baptist beholding the Spirit coming down as a dove) and John 1:38 of the Baptist gazing in rapture at Jesus. So also John 4:35; John 11:45; 1 John 1:1.; 1 John 4:12, 1 John 4:14. By this word John insists that in the human Jesus he beheld the Shekinah glory of God who was and is the Logos who existed before with God. By this plural John speaks for himself and all those who saw in Jesus what he did. As of the only begotten from the Father Strictly, “as of an only born from a father,” since there is no article with μονογενους monogenous or with πατρος patros In John 3:16; 1 John 4:9 we have τον μονογενη ton monogenē referring to Christ. This is the first use in the Gospel of πατηρ patēr of God in relation to the Logos. Μονογενης Monogenēs (only born rather than only begotten) here refers to the eternal relationship of the Logos (as in John 1:18) rather than to the Incarnation. It distinguishes thus between the Logos and the believers as children John clearly means to say that “the manifested glory of the Word was as it were the glory of the Eternal Father shared with His only Son” (Bernard). Cf. John 8:54; John 14:9; John 17:5. Full Probably indeclinable accusative adjective agreeing with δοχαν doxan (or genitive with μονογενους monogenous) of which we have papyri examples (Robertson, Grammar, p. 275). As nominative πληρης plērēs can agree with the subject of εσκηνωσεν eskēnōsen Of grace and truth Curiously this great word χαρις charis (grace), so common with Paul, does not occur in John‘s Gospel save in John 1:14, John 1:16, John 1:17, though αλητεια alētheia (truth) is one of the keywords in the Fourth Gospel and in 1John, occurring 25 times in the Gospel and 20 in the Johannine Epistles, 7 times in the Synoptics and not at all in Revelation (Bernard). In John 1:17 these two words picture the Gospel in Christ in contrast with the law of Moses. See Epistles of Paul for origin and use of both words. [source]
Second aorist passive participle of στρεπω strephō vividly picturing the sudden act of Jesus on hearing their steps behind him. Beheld First aorist middle participle of τεαομαι theaomai (John 1:32). Both participles here express antecedent action to λεγει legei (saith). Following Present active participle of ακολουτεω akoloutheō (John 1:37). It was Christ‘s first experience of this kind and the two came from the Baptist to Jesus. What seek ye? Not “whom” Aramaic title for “Teacher” which John here translates by Διδασκαλε Didaskale as he is writing late and for general readers. Luke, a Greek Christian, does not use it, but John recalls his first use of this term to Jesus and explains it. Matthew has it only in the greeting of Judas to the Master (Matthew 26:25, Matthew 26:49) and Mark once by Judas (Mark 14:45) and twice by Peter (Mark 9:5; Mark 11:21). John‘s Gospel has the disciples at first addressing Jesus by Rabbi while others address him by Κυριε Kurie (Lord or Sir) as in John 4:11, John 4:49; John 5:7. Peter uses Κυριε Kurie in John 6:68. In the end the disciples usually say Κυριε Kurie (John 13:6, John 13:25, etc.), but Mary Magdalene says αββουνει Rabbounei (John 20:16). Being interpreted Present passive participle of μετερμηνευω methermēneuō late compound of μετα meta and ερμηνευω hermēneuō to explain (John 1:42), old word from ερμες Hermes the god of speech (hermeneutics). John often explains Aramaic words (John 1:38, John 1:41, John 1:42; John 4:25; John 9:7, etc.). Where abidest thou? They wished a place for quiet converse with Jesus. [source]
Not yet “Lord” for her. See John 4:11. This water This peculiar kind of water. She did not grasp the last phrase “unto life eternal,” and speaks half ironically of “this water.” That I thirst not Final clause with ινα hina alluding to the words of Jesus, water that will prevent thirst. Neither come Carrying on the negative purpose with present middle subjunctive, “nor keep on coming” as she has to do once or twice every day. She is evidently puzzled and yet attracted. [source]
Ha, not οσα hosa (as many as), no “ever” in the Greek. But a guilty conscience (John 4:18.) led her to exaggerate a bit. Can this be the Christ? She is already convinced herself (John 4:26.), but she puts the question in a hesitant form to avoid arousing opposition. With a woman‘s intuition she avoided ουκ ouk and uses μητι mēti She does not take sides, but piques their curiosity. [source]
Inchoative imperfect, “began to persecute” and kept it up. They took this occasion as one excuse They disliked Jesus when here first (John 2:18) and were suspicious of his popularity (John 4:1). Now they have cause for an open breach. Because he did Imperfect active, not just this one act, but he was becoming a regular Sabbath-breaker. The Pharisees will watch his conduct on the Sabbath henceforth (Mark 2:23; Mark 3:2). [source]
Ερωταω Erōtaō for prayer, not question (the old use), also in John 16:23 (prayer to Jesus in same sense as αιτεω aiteō), John 14:26 (by Jesus as here); John 17:9 (by Jesus), “make request of.” Another Comforter Another of like kind This old word (Demosthenes), from παρακαλεω parakaleō was used for legal assistant, pleader, advocate, one who pleads another‘s cause (Josephus, Philo, in illiterate papyrus), in N.T. only in John‘s writings, though the idea of it is in Romans 8:26-34. Cf. Deissmann, Light, etcp. 336. So the Christian has Christ as his Paraclete with the Father, the Holy Spirit as the Father‘s Paraclete with us (John 14:16, John 14:26; John 15:26; John 16:7; 1 John 2:1). For ever This the purpose See John 4:14 for the idiom. [source]
First aorist active imperative of αντλεω antleō from ο αντλος ho antlos bilge water, or the hold where the bilge water settles (so in Homer). The verb occurs in John 4:7, John 4:15, for drawing water from the well, and Westcott so interprets it here, but needlessly so, since the servants seem bidden to draw from the large water-jars now full of water. Apparently the water was still water when it came out of the jars (John 2:9), but was changed to wine before reaching the guests. The water in the jars remained water. Unto the ruler of the feast Dative case. The τρικλινος triklinos was a room And they bare it Second aorist active indicative of περω pherō Apparently not knowing at first that they bore wine. [source]
This use of γαρ gar is quite in John‘s style in introducing his comments (John 2:25; John 4:8; John 5:13, etc.). This “Little Gospel” as it is often called, this “comfortable word” (the Anglican Liturgy), while not a quotation from Jesus is a just and marvellous interpretation of the mission and message of our Lord. In John 3:16-21 John recapitulates in summary fashion the teaching of Jesus to Nicodemus. Loved First aorist active indicative of αγαπαω agapaō the noble word so common in the Gospels for the highest form of love, used here as often in John (John 14:23; John 17:23; 1 John 3:1; 1 John 4:10) of God‘s love for man (cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:16; Romans 5:8; Ephesians 2:4). In John 21:15 John presents a distinction between αγαπαω agapaō and πιλεω phileō Αγαπαω Agapaō is used also for love of men for men (John 13:34), for Jesus (John 8:42), for God (1 John 4:10). The world The whole cosmos of men, including Gentiles, the whole human race. This universal aspect of God‘s love appears also in 2 Corinthians 5:19; Romans 5:8. That he gave The usual classical construction with ωστε hōste and the indicative (first aorist active) practical result, the only example in the N.T. save that in Galatians 2:13. Elsewhere ωστε hōste with the infinitive occurs for actual result (Matthew 13:32) as well as purpose (Matthew 10:1), though even this is rare. His only begotten Son “The Son the only begotten.” For this word see note on John 1:14, note on John 1:18; and John 3:18. The rest of the sentence, the purpose clause with ιναεχηι hina -εις αυτον echēi precisely reproduces the close of John 3:15 save that εν αυτωι eis auton takes the place of πιστευων en autōi (see John 1:12) and goes certainly with εχηι pisteuōn (not with εν αυτωι echēi as μη αποληται αλλα en autōi in John 3:15) and the added clause “should not perish but” The same contrast between “perish” and “eternal life” (for this world and the next) appears also in John 10:28. On “perish” see also John 17:12. [source]
Explanation To judge Final clause with ινα hina and the present (or aorist) active subjunctive of κρινω krinō The Messiah does judge the world as Jesus taught (Matthew 25:31.; John 5:27), but this was not the primary or the only purpose of his coming. See note on Matthew 7:1 for krinō to pick out, select, approve, condemn, used so often and in so many varying contexts in the N.T. But that the world should be saved through him First aorist passive subjunctive of κρινω sōzō the common verb to save (from αλλ ινα σωτηι ο κοσμος δι αυτου sōs safe and sound), from which σωζω sōtēr (Saviour) comes (the Saviour of the world, John 4:42; 1 John 4:14) and σως sōtēria (salvation, John 4:22 here only in John). The verb σωτηρ sōzō is often used for physical health (Mark 5:28), but here of the spiritual salvation as in John 5:34. [source]
Perfect active indicative of γινωσκω ginōskō “I have come to know and still know,” the knowledge of personal experience (John 2:24.). The love o‘ God Objective genitive, “the love toward God.” See Luke 11:42 for this phrase in the same sense (only other instance in the Gospels, but common in 1John (1 John 2:5; 1 John 3:17; 1 John 4:7, 1 John 4:9; 1 John 5:3) and in 2 Thessalonians 3:5; 2 Corinthians 13:14; Romans 5:5. The sense of God‘s love for man occurs in 1 John 3:1; 1 John 4:9, 1 John 4:10, 1 John 4:16; John 15:9. of Christ‘s love for man. These rabbis did not love God and hence did not love Christ. [source]
Used now instead of Rabbi (25) though how much the people meant by it is not clear. Evermore give us this bread Second aorist active imperative second singular like δος dos in Matthew 6:11 (urgent petition). What kind of bread do they mean? The Jewish commentaries and Philo speak of the manna as typifying heavenly bread for the soul. Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:3 seems to refer to the manna as “spiritual food.” Like the woman at the well (John 4:15) they long “always” to have “this bread,” a perpetual supply. It is probably to this crowd as the water in John 4:15 was to the woman. [source]
Added to the phrase in John 6:54 in the place of εχει ζωην αιωνιον echei zōēn aiōnion (has eternal life). The verb μενω menō (to abide) expresses continual mystical fellowship between Christ and the believer as in John 15:4-7; 1 John 2:6, 1 John 2:27, 1 John 2:28; 1 John 3:6, 1 John 3:24; 1 John 4:12, 1 John 4:16. There is, of course, no reference to the Lord‘s Supper (Eucharist), but simply to mystical fellowship with Christ. [source]
Reference to John 3:22. the work of the Baptist and the jealousy of his disciples. Ουν Oun is very common in John‘s Gospel in such transitions. The Lord So the best manuscripts (Neutral Alexandrian), though the Western class has ο Ιησους ho Iēsous Mark usually has ο Ιησους ho Iēsous and Luke often ο Κυριος ho Kurios In the narrative portion of John we have usually ο Ιησους ho Iēsous but ο Κυριος ho Kurios in five passages (John 4:1; John 6:23; John 11:2; John 20:20; John 21:12). There is no reason why John should not apply ο Κυριος ho Kurios to Jesus in the narrative sections as well as Luke. Bernard argues that these are “explanatory glosses,” not in the first draft of the Gospel. But why? When John wrote his Gospel he certainly held Jesus to be Κυριος Kurios (Lord) as Luke did earlier when he wrote both Gospel and Acts This is hypercriticism. Knew Second aorist active indicative of γινωσκω ginōskō The Pharisees knew this obvious fact. It was easy for Jesus to know the attitude of the Pharisees about it (John 2:24). Already the Pharisees are suspicious of Jesus. How that Declarative οτι hoti (indirect assertion). Was making and baptizing more disciples than John Present active indicative in both verbs retained in indirect discourse. Recall the tremendous success of John‘s early ministry (Mark 1:5; Matthew 3:5; Luke 3:7, Luke 3:15) in order to see the significance of this statement that Jesus had forged ahead of him in popular favour. Already the Pharisees had turned violently against John who had called them broods of vipers. It is most likely that they drew John out about the marriage of Herod Antipas and got him involved directly with the tetrarch so as to have him cast into prison (Luke 3:19.). Josephus (Ant. XVIII. v. 2) gives a public reason for this act of Herod Antipas, the fear that John would “raise a rebellion,” probably the public reason for his private vengeance as given by Luke. Apparently John was cast into prison, though recently still free (John 3:24), before Jesus left for Galilee. The Pharisees, with John out of the way, turn to Jesus with envy and hate. [source]
“A spring of Jacob” (here and John 4:14), but πρεαρ phrear (well, pit, cistern) in John 4:11 and John 4:12. It is really a cistern 100 feet deep dug by a stranger apparently in a land of abundant springs (Genesis 26:19). Wearied Perfect active participle of κοπιαω kopiaō a state of weariness. The verb means to toil excessively (Luke 5:5). John emphasizes the human emotions of Jesus (John 1:14; John 11:3, John 11:33, John 11:35, John 11:38, John 11:41.; John 12:27; John 13:21; John 19:28). With his journey As a result Imperfect (descriptive) middle of κατεζομαι kathezomai “was sitting.” Thus Probably “thus wearied,” graphic picture. By the well Literally, “upon the curbstone of the well.” Sixth hour Roman time, about 6 p.m., the usual time for drawing water. [source]
The Greek ανηρ anēr means either “man” or “husband.” She had her “man,” but he was not a legal “husband.” Her language veils her deceit. Thou saidst well Jesus saw through the double sense of her language and read her heart as he only can do, a supernatural gift of which John often speaks (John 1:48; John 2:24.; John 5:20). For thou hast had five husbands “For thou didst have five men.” Second aorist (constative) active indicative of εχω echō Is not thy husband In the full and legal sense of ανηρ anēr not a mere “man.” This hast thou said truly “This a true thing thou hast said.” Note absence of article with αλητες alēthes (predicate accusative). Perfect active indicative ειρηκας eirēkas here, not aorist ειπες eipes (John 4:17). [source]
See this same phrase in John 5:25. This item could not be added in John 4:21 for local worship was not abolished, but spiritual independence of place was called for at once. So contrast John 5:25, John 5:28; John 16:25, John 16:32. The true worshippers See John 1:9 for αλητινος alēthinos (genuine). Προσκυνητης Proskunētēs is a late word from προσκυνεω proskuneō to bow the knee, to worship, occurs here only in N.T., but is found in one pre-Christian inscription (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 101) and in one of the 3rd century a.d. (Moulton & Milligan, Vocabulary). In spirit and truth This is what matters, not where, but how (in reality, in the spirit of man, the highest part of man, and so in truth). All this is according to the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:5) who is the Spirit of truth (John 16:13). Here Jesus has said the final word on worship, one needed today. Seeketh The Father has revealed himself in the Son who is the truth (John 14:6, John 14:9). It does matter whether we have a true conception of God whom we worship. To be his worshippers Rather, “seeks such as those who worship him” (predicate accusative articular participle in apposition with τοιουτους toioutous (such). John pictures the Father as seeking worshippers, a doctrine running all through the Gospel (John 3:16; John 6:44; John 15:16; 1 John 4:10). [source]
The spiritual harvester can gather his harvest without waiting four months. Jesus is reaping a harvest right now by the conversion of this woman. The labourer is worthy of his hire (Luke 10:7; 2 Timothy 2:6). John does not use μιστος misthos (reward) again, but καρπος karpos (John 15:2-16), “fruit for life eternal” (cf. John 4:14). That he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together Final use of ινα hina with present active subjunctive of χαιρω chairō to rejoice, in the singular with ο σπειρων ho speirōn (the sower) and to be repeated with ο τεριζων ho therizōn (the reaper). The adverb ομου homou (together) elsewhere in N.T. only John 20:4; John 21:2; Acts 2:1. Usually considerable time passes between the sowing and the reaping as in John 4:35. Amos (Amos 9:13) spoke of the time when “the ploughman shall overtake the reaper” and that has happened here with the joy of the harvest time (Isaiah 9:3). Jesus the Sower and the disciples as the reapers are here rejoicing simultaneously. [source]
“No longer because of thy talk,” good and effective as that was. Λαλια Lalia (cf. λαλεω laleō) is talk, talkativeness, mode of speech, one‘s vernacular, used by Jesus of his own speech (John 8:43). We have heard Perfect active indicative of ακουω akouō their abiding experience. For ourselves Just “ourselves.” The Saviour of the world See Matthew 1:21 for σωτηρ sōseiused of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term sōtēr to Jesus again in 1 John 4:14. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (John 4:22). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (John 4:26) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: “At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah.” But why “merely”? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their “Saviour,” Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on John 4:42: “That in the first century Messiah was given the title sōtēr is not proven.” The use of “saviour and god” for Ptolemy in the third century b.c. is well known. “The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East” (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 5:31; Acts 3:23; Philemon 3:20; Ephesians 5:23; Titus 1:4; Titus 2:13; Titus 3:6; 2 Timothy 1:10; 2 Peter 1:1, 2 Peter 1:11; 2 Peter 2:20; 2 Peter 3:2, 2 Peter 3:18). All these are writings of the first century a.d. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world. [source]
Perfect active indicative of ακουω akouō their abiding experience. For ourselves Just “ourselves.” The Saviour of the world See Matthew 1:21 for σωτηρ sōseiused of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term sōtēr to Jesus again in 1 John 4:14. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (John 4:22). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (John 4:26) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: “At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah.” But why “merely”? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their “Saviour,” Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on John 4:42: “That in the first century Messiah was given the title sōtēr is not proven.” The use of “saviour and god” for Ptolemy in the third century b.c. is well known. “The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East” (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 5:31; Acts 3:23; Philemon 3:20; Ephesians 5:23; Titus 1:4; Titus 2:13; Titus 3:6; 2 Timothy 1:10; 2 Peter 1:1, 2 Peter 1:11; 2 Peter 2:20; 2 Peter 3:2, 2 Peter 3:18). All these are writings of the first century a.d. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world. [source]
Just “ourselves.” The Saviour of the world See Matthew 1:21 for σωτηρ sōseiused of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term sōtēr to Jesus again in 1 John 4:14. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (John 4:22). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (John 4:26) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: “At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah.” But why “merely”? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their “Saviour,” Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on John 4:42: “That in the first century Messiah was given the title sōtēr is not proven.” The use of “saviour and god” for Ptolemy in the third century b.c. is well known. “The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East” (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 5:31; Acts 3:23; Philemon 3:20; Ephesians 5:23; Titus 1:4; Titus 2:13; Titus 3:6; 2 Timothy 1:10; 2 Peter 1:1, 2 Peter 1:11; 2 Peter 2:20; 2 Peter 3:2, 2 Peter 3:18). All these are writings of the first century a.d. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world. [source]
See Matthew 1:21 for σωτηρ sōseiused of Jesus by the angel Gabriel. John applies the term sōtēr to Jesus again in 1 John 4:14. Jesus had said to the woman that salvation is of the Jews (John 4:22). He clearly told the Samaritans during these two days that he was the Messiah as he had done to the woman (John 4:26) and explained that to mean Saviour of Samaritans as well as Jews. Sanday thinks that probably John puts this epithet of Saviour in the mouth of the Samaritans, but adds: “At the same time it is possible that such an epithet might be employed by them merely as synonymous with Messiah.” But why “merely”? Was it not natural for these Samaritans who took Jesus as their “Saviour,” Jew as he was, to enlarge the idea to the whole world? Bernard has this amazing statement on John 4:42: “That in the first century Messiah was given the title sōtēr is not proven.” The use of “saviour and god” for Ptolemy in the third century b.c. is well known. “The ample materials collected by Magie show that the full title of honour, Saviour of the world, with which St. John adorns the Master, was bestowed with sundry variations in the Greek expression on Julius Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Trajan, Hadrian, and other Emperors in inscriptions in the Hellenistic East” (Deissmann, Light, etc., p. 364). Perhaps Bernard means that the Jews did not call Messiah Saviour. But what of it? The Romans so termed their emperors and the New Testament so calls Christ (Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 5:31; Acts 3:23; Philemon 3:20; Ephesians 5:23; Titus 1:4; Titus 2:13; Titus 3:6; 2 Timothy 1:10; 2 Peter 1:1, 2 Peter 1:11; 2 Peter 2:20; 2 Peter 3:2, 2 Peter 3:18). All these are writings of the first century a.d. The Samaritan villagers rise to the conception that he was the Saviour of the world. [source]
John‘s explanation of the conduct of Jesus by quoting a proverb often used by Jesus (Mark 6:4; Matthew 13:57; Luke 4:24 in reference to Nazareth), but not necessarily used by Jesus on this occasion. A similar proverb has been found in Plutarch, Pliny, Seneca. A prophet hath no honour in his own country What is meant by πατριδι patridi In the Synoptics (Luke 4:24; Mark 6:4; Matthew 13:57) the reference is to Nazareth where he was twice rejected. But what has John in mind in quoting it here? He probably knew the quotations in the Synoptics. Does John refer to Judea by “his own country”? If so, the application hardly fits for he had already explained that Jesus was leaving Judea because he was too popular there (John 4:1-3). If he means Galilee, he immediately mentions the cordial welcome accorded Jesus there (John 4:45). But even so this is probably John‘s meaning for he is speaking of the motive of Jesus in going into Galilee where he had not yet laboured and where he apparently had no such fame as in Judea and now in Samaria. [source]
Εκεινος Ekeinos (that one; cf. John 5:35, John 5:38), not αυτος autos Perfect active indicative of μαρτυρεω martureō the direct witness of the Father, besides the indirect witness of the works. Jesus is not speaking of the voice of the Father at his baptism (Mark 1:11), the transfiguration (Mark 9:7), nor even at the time of the visit of the Greeks (John 12:28). This last voice was heard by many who thought it was thunder or an angel. The language of Jesus refers to the witness of the Father in the heart of the believers as is made plain in 1 John 5:9, 1 John 5:10. God‘s witness does not come by audible “voice” Cf. John 1:18; John 6:46; 1 John 4:12. Ακηκοατε Akēkoate is perfect active indicative of ακουω akouō to hear, and εωρακατε heōrakate is perfect active indicative of οραω horaō to see. It is a permanent state of failure to hear and see God. The experience of Jacob in Peniel (Genesis 32:30) was unusual, but Jesus will say that those who have seen him have seen the Father (John 14:9), but here he means the Father‘s “voice” and “form” as distinct from the Son. [source]
“The bread the living.” Repetition of the claim in John 6:35, John 6:41, John 6:48, but with a slight change from ζωης zōēs to ζων zōn (present active participle of ζαω zaō). It is alive and can give life. See John 4:10 for living water. In Revelation 1:17 Jesus calls himself the Living One For ever Eternally like αιωνιον aiōnion with ζωην zōēn in John 6:47. I shall give Emphasis on εγω egō (I). Superior so to Moses. Is my flesh See note on John 1:14 for σαρχ sarx the Incarnation. This new idea creates far more difficulty to the hearers who cannot grasp Christ‘s idea of self-sacrifice. For the life of the world Over, in behalf of, υπερ huper means, and in some connexions instead of as in John 11:50. See John 1:30 for the Baptist‘s picture of Christ as the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. See also John 3:17; John 4:42; 1 John 3:16; Matthew 20:28; Galatians 3:13; 2 Corinthians 5:14.; Romans 5:8. Jesus has here presented to this Galilean multitude the central fact of his atoning death for the spiritual life of the world. [source]
“His brothers” (half-brothers actually), who “were not believing on him” Depart hence Second aorist active imperative of μεταβαινω metabainō to pass to another place (John 5:24; John 13:1). It was impertinence on their part. That thy disciples also may behold Final clause with ινα hina and the future active indicative of τεωρεω theōreō Jesus had many disciples in Judea at the start (John 2:23; John 4:1) and had left it because of the jealousy of the Pharisees over his success (John 4:3). The brothers may have heard of the great defection in the synagogue in Capernaum (John 6:66), but the advice is clearly ironical. Which thou doest To what works they refer by this language we do not know. But Jesus had been away from Galilee for some months and from Judea for a year and a half. Perhaps the brothers of Jesus may actually have been eager to rush Jesus into the hostile atmosphere of Jerusalem again. [source]
Nominative absolute as is not uncommon. The scripture No precise passage can be quoted, though similar idea in several (Isaiah 55:1; Isaiah 58:11; Zechariah 13:1; Zechariah 14:8; Ezekiel 47:1; Joel 3:18). Chrysostom confines it to Isaiah 28:16 by punctuation (only the nominative absolute as the Scripture). Out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water Some ancient Western writers connect πινετω pinetō of John 7:37 with ο πιστευων ho pisteuōn in John 7:38. By this arrangement αυτου autou (his) with κοιλιας koilias is made to refer to Christ, not to the believer. Burney argues that κοιλια koilia is a mistranslation of the Aramaic (fountain, not belly) and that the reference is to Ezekiel 47:1. C.C. Torrey refers to Zechariah 14:8. But the Eastern writers refer αυτου autou (his) to the believer who not only quenches in Christ his own thirst, but becomes a source of new streams for others (John 4:14). It is a difficult question and Westcott finally changed his view and held αυτου autou to refer to Christ. ευσουσιν Reusousin is future active indicative of ρεω reō old verb, to flow, here only in the N.T. [source]
From γη gē (land), of the same land, old word. See Luke 14:2. Saw him Present active participle of τεωρεω theōreō who used to observe him. Aforetime Adverbial accusative, “the former time,” formerly. That he was a beggar See John 4:19; John 12:19 for declarative οτι hoti after τεωρεω theōreō But it is entirely possible that οτι hoti here is “because” (Westcott). Προσαιτης Prosaitēs is a late word for beggar, in N.T. only here and Mark 10:46. It is from προσαιτεω prosaiteō to ask in addition (see προσαιτων prosaitōn below), a thing that beggars know how to do. Is not this he that sat and begged? He had his regular place and was a familiar figure. But now his eyes are wide open. [source]
A neat Greek idiom difficult to render smoothly into English: “Not after many days these.” The litotes (not many=few) is common in Luke (Luke 7:6; Luke 15:13; Acts 17:27; Acts 19:11; Acts 20:12; Acts 21:39; Acts 28:14; Acts 28:2). The predicate use of ταυτας tautas (without article) is to be noted. “These” really means as a starting point, “from these” (Robertson, Grammar, p. 702). It was ten days hence. This idiom occurs several times in Luke (Luke 24:21; Acts 24:21), as elsewhere (John 4:18; 2 Peter 3:1). In Luke 2:12 the copula is easily supplied as it exists in Luke 1:36; Luke 2:2. [source]
The verb means primarily to exchange; and hence to change the relation of hostile parties into a relation of peace; to reconcile. It is used of both mutual and one-sided enmity. In the former case, the context must show on which side is the active enmity. In the Christian sense, the change in the relation of God and man effected through Christ. This involves, 1. A movement of God toward man with a view to break down man's hostility, to commend God's love and holiness to him, and to convince him of the enormity and the consequence of sin. It is God who initiates this movement in the person and work of Jesus Christ. See Romans 5:6, Romans 5:8; 2 Corinthians 5:18, 2 Corinthians 5:19; Ephesians 1:6; 1 John 4:19. Hence the passive form of the verb here: we were made subjects of God's reconciling 1John href="/desk/?q=1jo+1:3&sr=1">1 John 1:3, 1 John 1:7. Thus there is complete reconciliation. See, further, on Romans 3:25, Romans 3:26. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
The verb πιστεύω tobelieve is used in the New Testament as follows: 1. Transitively, with the accusative and dative: to entrust something to one, Luke 16:11; John 2:24. In the passive, to be entrusted with something, Romans 3:2; 1 Corinthians 9:17; Galatians 2:7. With the simple accusative, to believe a thing, John 11:26; 1 John 4:16. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 2. With the infinitive, Acts 15:11. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 3. With ὅτι that Matthew 9:28; Mark 11:24; James 2:19. Especially frequent in John: John 4:21; John 11:27, John 11:42; John 13:19; John 14:10, John 14:11; John 16:27, John 16:30, etc. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 4. With the simple dative, meaning to believe a person or thing, that they are true or speak the truth, John 2:22; John 4:21; John 5:46. See on John 1:12; see on John 2:22, John 2:23; see on John 8:31; see on John 10:37. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 5. With the preposition ἐν inNot frequent, and questioned in some of the passages cited for illustration. In John 3:15, ἐν αὐτῷ inHim, is probably to be construed with have eternal life. The formula occurs nowhere else in John. In Mark 1:15we find πιστεύετε ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ believein the gospel. The kindred noun πίστις faithoccurs in this combination. Thus Galatians 3:26, though some join in Christ Jesus with sons. See also Ephesians 1:15; Colossians 1:4; 1 Timothy 3:13; 2 Timothy 3:15; Romans 3:25. This preposition indicates the sphere in which faith moves, rather than the object to which it is directed, though instances occur in the Septuagint where it plainly indicates the direction of faith, Psalm 78:22; Jeremiah 12:6. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 6. With the preposition ἐπί uponon to, unto. a. With the accusative, Romans 4:5; Acts 9:42; Acts 11:17; Acts 16:31; Acts 22:19. The preposition carries the idea of mental direction with a view to resting upon, which latter idea is conveyed by the same preposition. b. With the dative, 1 Timothy 1:16; Luke 24:25; compare Romans 9:33; Romans 10:11; 1 Peter 2:6. The dative expresses absolute superposition. Christ as the object of faith, is the basis on which faith rests. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 7. With the preposition εἰς into Matthew 18:6; John 2:11; Acts 19:4; Romans 10:14; Galatians 2:16; Philemon 1:29, etc. The preposition conveys the idea of the absolute transference of trust from one's self to another. Literally the phrase means to believe into. See on John 1:12; see on John 2:23; see on John 9:35; see on John 12:44.Is counted for righteousness ( λογίζεται εἰς δικαιοσύνην )Rev., is reckoned. See on Romans 4:3. The preposition εἰς has the force of as, not the telic meaning with a view to, or in order that he may be (righteous); nor strictly, in the place of righteousness. Faith is not a substitute for righteousness, since righteousness is involved in faith. When a man is reckoned righteous through faith, it is not a legal fiction. He is not indeed a perfect man, but God does not reckon something which has no real existence. Faith is the germ of righteousness, of life in God. God recognizes no true life apart from holiness, and “he that believeth on the Son hath life.” He is not merely regarded in the law's eye as living. God accepts the germ, not in place of the fruit, but as containing the fruit. “Abraham believed God … . No soul comes into such a relation of trust without having God's investment upon it; and whatever there may be in God's righteousness - love, truth, sacrifice - will be rightfully imputed or counted to be in it, because, being united to Him, it will have them coming over derivatively from Him” (Bushnell). The idea of logical sequence is inherent in λογίζεται isreckoned - the sequence of character upon faith. Where there is faith there is, logically, righteousness, and the righteousness is from faith unto faith (Romans 1:17). Nevertheless, in the highest development of the righteousness of faith, it will remain true that the man is justified, not by the works of righteousness, which are the fruit of faith, but by the faith which, in making him a partaker of the life and righteousness of God, generates and inspires the works. Observe that the believer's own faith is reckoned as righteousness. “In no passage in Paul's writings or in other parts of the New Testament, where the phrase to reckon for or the verb to reckon alone is used, is there a declaration that anything belonging to one person is imputed, accounted, or reckoned to another, or a formal statement that Christ's righteousness is imputed to believers” (President Dwight, “Notes on Meyer”). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
This word is most important, since it is the key to the conception of Christ's atoning work. In the New Testament it occurs only here and Hebrews 9:5; and must be studied in connection with the following kindred words: ἱλάσκομαι which occurs in the New Testament only Luke 18:13, God be merciful, and Hebrews 2:17, to make reconciliation. Ἱλασμός twice, 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10; in both cases rendered propitiation. The compound ἐξιλάσκομαι , which is not found in the New Testament, but is frequent in the Septuagint and is rendered purge, cleanse, reconcile, make atonement. Septuagint usage. These words mostly represent the Hebrew verb kaphar to cover or conceal, and its derivatives. With only seven exceptions, out of about sixty or seventy passages in the Old Testament, where the Hebrew is translated by atone or atonement, the Septuagint employs some part or derivative of ἱλάσκομαι or ἐξιλάσκομαι or Ἱλασμός or ἐξιλασμός is the usual Septuagint translation for kippurim covering for sin, A.V., atonement. Thus sin-offerings of atonement; day of atonement; ram of the atonement. See Exodus 29:36; Exodus 30:10; Leviticus 23:27; Numbers 5:8, etc. They are also used for chattath sin-offering, Ezekiel 44:27; Ezekiel 45:19; and for selichah forgiveness. Psalm 129:4; Daniel 9:9. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- These words are always used absolutely, without anything to mark the offense or the person propitiated. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Ἱλάσκομαι , which is comparatively rare, occurs as a translation of kipher to cover sin, Psalm 65:3; Psalm 78:38; Psalm 79:9; A.V., purge away, forgive, pardon. Of salach to bear away as a burden, Leviticus 14:48-539; Psalm 25:11: A.V., forgive, pardon. It is used with the accusative (direct objective) case, marking the sin, or with the dative (indirect objective), as be conciliated to our sins. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Ἑξιλάσκομαι mostly represents kipher to cover, and is more common than the simple verb. Thus, purge the altar, Ezekiel 43:26; cleanse the sanctuary, Ezekiel 45:20; reconcile the house, Daniel 9:24. It is found with the accusative case of that which is cleansed; with the preposition περί concerningas “for your sin,” Exodus 32:30; with the preposition ὑπέρ onbehalf of A.V., for, Ezekiel 45:17; absolutely, to make an atonement, Leviticus 16:17; with the preposition ἀπό fromas “cleansed from the blood,” Numbers 35:33. There are but two instances of the accusative of the person propitiated: appease him, Genesis 32:20; pray before (propitiate) the Lord, Zechariah 7:2. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Ἱλαστηριον , A.V., propitiation, is almost always used in the Old Testament of the mercy-seat or golden cover of the ark, and this is its meaning in Hebrews 9:5, the only other passage of the New Testament in which it is found. In Ezekiel 43:14, Ezekiel 43:17, Ezekiel 43:20, it means a ledge round a large altar, and is rendered settle in A.V.; Rev., ledge, in margin. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- This term has been unduly pressed into the sense of explanatory sacrifice. In the case of the kindred verbs, the dominant Old-Testament sense is not propitiation in the sense of something offered to placate or appease anger; but atonement or reconciliation, through the covering, and so getting rid of the sin which stands between God and man. The thrust of the idea is upon the sin or uncleanness, not upon the offended party. Hence the frequent interchange with ἀγιάζω tosanctify, and καθαρίζω tocleanse. See Ezekiel 43:26, where ἐξιλάσονται shallpurge, and καθαριοῦσιν shallpurify, are used coordinately. See also Exodus 30:10, of the altar of incense: “Aaron shall make an atonement ( ἐξιλάσεται ) upon the horns of it - with the blood of the sin-offering of atonement ” ( καθαρισμοῦ purification). Compare Leviticus 16:20. The Hebrew terms are also used coordinately. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Our translators frequently render the verb kaphar by reconcile, Leviticus 6:30; Leviticus 16:20; Ezekiel 45:20. In Leviticus 8:15, Moses put blood upon the horns of the altar and cleansed ( ἐκαθάρισε ) the altar, and sanctified ( ἡγίασεν ) it, to make reconciliation ( τοῦ ἐξιλάσασθαι ) upon it. Compare Ezekiel 45:15, Ezekiel 45:17; Daniel 9:24. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The verb and its derivatives occur where the ordinary idea of expiation is excluded. As applied to an altar or to the walls of a house (1713610853_51), this idea could have no force, because these inanimate things, though ceremonially unclean, could have no sin to be expiated. Moses, when he went up to make atonement for the idolatry at Sinai, offered no sacrifice, but only intercession. See also the case of Korah, Numbers 16:46; the cleansing of leprosy and of mothers after childbirth, Leviticus href="/desk/?q=le+12:7&sr=1">Leviticus 12:7; Leviticus 15:30; the reformation of Josiah, Ezra href="/desk/?q=ezr+10:1-15&sr=1">Ezra 10:1-15; the offering of the Israelite army after the defeat of Midian. They brought bracelets, rings, etc., to make an atonement ( ἐξιλάσασθαι ) before the Lord; not expiatory, but a memorial, Numbers 31:50-54. The Passover was in no sense expiatory; but Paul says, “Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us; therefore purge out ( ἐκκαθάρατε ) the old leaven. Let us keep the feast with sincerity and truth;” 1 Corinthians 5:7, 1 Corinthians 5:8. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In the Old Testament the idea of sacrifice as in itself a propitiation continually recedes before that of the personal character lying back of sacrifice, and which alone gives virtue to it. See 1 Samuel 15:22; Psalm 40:6-10; Psalm 50:8-14, Psalm 50:23; Psalm 51:16, Psalm 51:17; Isaiah 1:11-18; Jeremiah 7:21-23; Amos 5:21-24; Micah 6:6-8. This idea does not recede in the Old Testament to be reemphasized in the New. On the contrary, the New Testament emphasizes the recession, and lays the stress upon the cleansing and life-giving effect of the sacrifice of Christ. See John 1:29; Colossians 1:20-22; Hebrews 9:14; Hebrews 10:19-21; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 John 1:7; 1 John 4:10-13. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The true meaning of the offering of Christ concentrates, therefore, not upon divine justice, but upon human character; not upon the remission of penalty for a consideration, but upon the deliverance from penalty through moral transformation; not upon satisfying divine justice, but upon bringing estranged man into harmony with God. As Canon Westcott remarks: “The scripture conception of ἱλάσκεσθαι is not that of appeasing one who is angry with a personal feeling against the offender, but of altering the character of that which, from without, occasions a necessary alienation, and interposes an inevitable obstacle to fellowship” (Commentary on St. John's Epistles, p. 85). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In the light of this conception we are brought back to that rendering of ἱλαστήριον which prevails in the Septuagint, and which it has in the only other New-Testament passage where it occurs (Hebrews 9:5) - mercy-seat; a rendering, maintained by a large number of the earlier expositors, and by some of the ablest of the moderns. That it is the sole instance of its occurrence in this sense is a fact which has its parallel in the terms Passover, Door, Rock, Amen, Day-spring, and others, applied to Christ. To say that the metaphor is awkward counts for nothing in the light of other metaphors of Paul. To say that the concealment of the ark is inconsistent with set forth is to adduce the strongest argument in favor of this rendering. The contrast with set forth falls in perfectly with the general conception. That mercy-seat which was veiled, and which the Jew could approach only once a fear, and then through the medium of the High-Priest, is now brought out where all can draw nigh and experience its reconciling power (Hebrews 10:19, Hebrews 10:22; compare Hebrews 9:8). “The word became flesh and dwelt among us. We beheld His glory. We saw and handled” (John 1:14; 1 John 1:1-3). The mercy-seat was the meetingplace of God and man (Exodus 25:17-22; Leviticus 16:2; Numbers 7:89); the place of mediation and manifestation. Through Christ, the antitype of the mercy-seat, the Mediator, man has access to the Father (Ephesians 2:18). As the golden surface covered the tables of the law, so Christ stands over the law, vindicating it as holy and just and good, and therewith vindicating the divine claim to obedience and holiness. As the blood was annually sprinkled on the golden cover by the High-Priest, so Christ is set forth “in His blood,” not shed to appease God's wrath, to satisfy God's justice, nor to compensate for man's disobedience, but as the highest expression of divine love for man, taking common part with humanity even unto death, that it might reconcile it through faith and self-surrender to God.Through faithConnect with propitiation (mercy-seat). The sacrifice of Christ becomes effective through the faith which appropriates it. Reconciliation implies two parties. “No propitiation reaches the mark that does not on its way, reconcile or bring into faith, the subject for whom it is made. There is no God-welcome prepared which does not open the guilty heart to welcome God” (Bushnell).In His bloodConstrue with set forth, and render as Rev., by His blood; i.e., in that He caused Him to shed His blood.To declare His righteousness ( εἱς ἔνδειξιν τῆς δικαιοσύνης αὐτοῦ )Lit., for a shewing, etc. Rev., to shew. For practical proof or demonstration. Not, as so often explained, to shew God's righteous indignation against sin by wreaking its penalty on the innocent Christ. The shewing of the cross is primarily the shewing of God's love and yearning to be at one with man (John 3:14-17). The righteousness of God here is not His “judicial” or “punitive” righteousness, but His righteous character, revealing its antagonism to sin in its effort to save man from his sin, and put forward as a ground of mercy, not as an obstacle to mercy.For the remission of sins that are past ( διὰ τὴν πάρεσιν τῶν προγεγονότων ἁμαρτημάτων )Rev., correctly, because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime. Passing over, praetermission, differs from remission ( ἄφεσις ). In remission guilt and punishment are sent away; in praetermission they are wholly or partially undealt with. Compare Acts 14:16; Acts 17:30. Ἁμάρτημα sinis the separate and particular deed of disobedience, while ἁμαρτία includes sin in the abstract - sin regarded as sinfulness. Sins done aforetime are the collective sins of the world before Christ.Through the forbearance of God ( ἐν τῇ ἀνοχῇ τοῦ Θεοῦ )Rev., in the forbearance. Construe with the passing by. The word ἀνοχή forbearancefrom ἀνέχω tohold up, occurs in the New Testament only here and Romans 2:4. It is not found in the Septuagint proper, and is not frequent in classical Greek, where it is used of a holding back or stopping of hostilities; a truce; in later Greek, a permission. The passage has given much trouble to expositors, largely, I think, through their insisting on the sense of forbearance with reference to sins - the toleration or refraining from punishment of sins done aforetime. But it is a fair construction of the term to apply it, in its primary sense of holding back, to the divine method of dealing with sin. It cannot be said that God passed over the sins of the world before Christ without penalty, for that is plainly contradicted by Romans 1:18-32; but He did pass them over in the sense that He did not apply, but held back the redeeming agency of God manifest in the flesh until the “fullness of time.” The sacrifices were a homage rendered to God's righteousness, but they did not touch sin with the power and depth which attached to Christ's sacrifice. No demonstration of God's righteousness and consequent hatred of sin, could be given equal to that of the life and death of Jesus. Hence Paul, as I take it, says: God set forth Christ as the world's mercy-seat, for the showing forth of His righteousness, because previously He had given no such manifestation of His righteousness, but had held it back, passing over, with the temporary institution of sacrifices, the sin at the roots of which He finally struck in the sacrifice of Christ. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]
The same, i.e., this same man who loves God. He does not say knows God, but implies this in the larger truth, is known by God. Compare Galatians 4:9; 1 John 4:7, 1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16; 2 Timothy 2:19. Γινώσκω in New-Testament Greek often denotes a personal relation between the knower and the known, so that the knowledge of an object implies the influence of that object upon the knower. So John 2:24, John 2:25; 1 Corinthians 2:8; 1 John 4:8. In John the relation itself is expressed by the verb. John 17:3, John 17:25; 1 John 5:20; 1 John 4:6; 1 John 2:3, 1 John 2:4, 1 John 2:5. [source]
Rev., correctly, discernings. Distinguishing between the different prophetic utterances, whether they proceed from true or false spirits. See 1 Timothy 4:1; 1 John 4:1, 1 John 4:2. [source]
Διακρισις Diakrisis is old word from διακρινω diakrinō (see note on 1 Corinthians 11:29) and in N.T. only here; Romans 14:1; Hebrews 5:14. A most needed gift to tell whether the gifts were really of the Holy Spirit and supernatural (cf. so-called “gifts” today) or merely strange though natural or even diabolical (1 Timothy 4:1; 1 John 4:1.). [source]
Loving God (condition of first class again) is the way to come to know God. It is not certain whether ουτος houtos refers to the man who loves God or to God who is loved. Both are true. God knows those that are his (2 Timothy 2:19; Exodus 33:12). Those who know God are known of God (Galatians 4:9). We love God because he first loved us (1 John 4:19). But here Paul uses both ideas and both verbs. Εγνωσται Egnōstai is perfect passive indicative of γινωσκω ginōskō an abiding state of recognition by God sets the seal of his favour on the one who loves him. So much for the principle. [source]
Opinions are divided as to whether the relation was that of marriage or concubinage. The former is urged on the ground that ἔχειν tohave is commonly used in the New Testament of marriage; and that the aorist participles ποιήσας (so Tex. Rec.) had done, and κατεργασαμενον hathwrought, imply that an incestuous marriage had already taken place. It is urged, on the other hand, that ἔχειν tohave is used of concubinage, John 4:18; but it takes its meaning there from the sense of marriage in the preceding clause, and is really a kind of play on the word. “He who now stands for thy husband is not thy husband.” The indications seem to be in favor of marriage. Notwithstanding the facilities for divorce afforded by the Roman law, and the loose morals of the Corinthians, for a man to marry his stepmother was regarded as a scandal. [source]
Late word from προπητης prophētēs and προπημι prophēmi to speak forth. Common in papyri. This gift Paul will praise most (chapter 1 Corinthians 14). Not always prediction, but a speaking forth of God‘s message under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Discernings of spirits (διακρισεις πνευματων diakriseis pneumatōn). Διακρισις Diakrisis is old word from διακρινω diakrinō (see note on 1 Corinthians 11:29) and in N.T. only here; Romans 14:1; Hebrews 5:14. A most needed gift to tell whether the gifts were really of the Holy Spirit and supernatural (cf. so-called “gifts” today) or merely strange though natural or even diabolical (1 Timothy 4:1; 1 John 4:1.). Divers kinds of tongues No word for “divers” in the Greek. There has arisen a great deal of confusion concerning the gift of tongues as found in Corinth. They prided themselves chiefly on this gift which had become a source of confusion and disorder. There were varieties (kinds, γενη genē) in this gift, but the gift was essentially an ecstatic utterance of highly wrought emotion that edified the speaker (1 Corinthians 14:4) and was intelligible to God (1 Corinthians 14:2, 1 Corinthians 14:28). It was not always true that the speaker in tongues could make clear what he had said to those who did not know the tongue (1 Corinthians 14:13): It was not mere gibberish or jargon like the modern “tongues,” but in a real language that could be understood by one familiar with that tongue as was seen on the great Day of Pentecost when people who spoke different languages were present. In Corinth, where no such variety of people existed, it required an interpreter to explain the tongue to those who knew it not. Hence Paul placed this gift lowest of all. It created wonder, but did little real good. This is the error of the Irvingites and others who have tried to reproduce this early gift of the Holy Spirit which was clearly for a special emergency and which was not designed to help spread the gospel among men. See notes on Acts 2:13-21; notes on Acts Acts 10:44-46; and note on Acts 19:6. The interpretation of tongues (ερμηνεια γλωσσων hermēneia glōssōn). Old word, here only and 1 Corinthians 14:26 in N.T., from ερμηνευω hermēneuō from ερμης Hermēs (the god of speech). Cf. on διερμηνευω diermēneuō in Luke 24:27; Acts 9:36. In case there was no one present who understood the particular tongue it required a special gift of the Spirit to some one to interpret it if any one was to receive benefit from it. [source]
Here Paul uses one of his great doctrinal words, καταλλασσω katallassō old word for exchanging coins. Διαλλασσω Diallassō to change one‘s mind, to reconcile, occurs in N.T. only in Matthew 5:24 though in papyri (Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, p. 187), and common in Attic. Καταλλασσω Katallassō is old verb, but more frequent in later writers. We find συναλλασσω sunallassō in Acts 7:26 and αποκαταλλασσω apokatallassō in Colossians 1:20.; Ephesians 2:16 and the substantive καταλλαγη katallagē in Romans 5:11; Romans 11:15 as well as here. It is hard to discuss this great theme without apparent contradiction. God‘s love (John 3:16) provided the means and basis for man‘s reconciliation to God against whom he had sinned. It is all God‘s plan because of his love, but God‘s own sense of justice had to be satisfied (Romans 3:26) and so God gave his Son as a propitiation for our sins (Romans 3:25; Colossians 1:20; 1 John 2:2; 1 John 4:10). The point made by Paul here is that God needs no reconciliation, but is engaged in the great business of reconciling us to himself. This has to be done on God‘s terms and is made possible through (δια dia) Christ. [source]
Comp. love of the Spirit, Romans 15:30. In Class. φιλεῖν is the most general designation of love, denoting an inner inclination to persons or things, and standing opposed to μισεῖν or ἐχθαίρειν tohate. It occasionally acquires from the context a sensual flavor, as Hom. Od. xviii. 325; Hdt. iv. 176, thus running into the sense of ἐρᾶν which denotes sensual love. It is love to persons and things growing out of intercourse and amenities or attractive qualities. Στέργειν (not in N.T., lxx, Sirach 27:17) expresses a deep, quiet, appropriating, natural love, as distinguished from that which is called out by circumstances. Unlike φιλεῖν , it has a distinct moral significance, and is not applied to base inclinations opposed to a genuine manly nature. It is the word for love to parents, wife, children, king or country, as one's own. Aristotle (Nic. ix. 7,3) speaks of poets as loving ( στέργοντες ) their own poems as their children. See also Eurip. Med. 87. Ἁγαπᾶν is to love out of an intelligent estimate of the object of love. It answers to Lat. diligere, or Germ. schatzen to prize. It is not passionate and sensual as ἐρᾶν . It is not, like φιλεῖν , attachment to a person independently of his quality and created by close intercourse. It is less sentiment than consideration. While φιλεῖν contemplates the person, ἀγαπᾶν contemplates the attributes and character, and gives an account of its inclination. Ἁγαπᾶν is really the weaker expression for love, as that term is conventionally used. It is judicial rather than affectionate. Even in classical usage, however, the distinction between ἀγαπᾶν and φιλεῖν is often very subtle, and well-nigh impossible to express. In N.T. ἐπιθυμαῖν todesire or lust is used instead of ἐρᾶν . In lxx ἀγαπᾶν is far more common than φιλεῖν . Φιλεῖν occurs only 16 times in the sense of love, and 16 times in the sense of kiss; while ἀγαπᾶν is found nearly 300 times. It is used with a wide range, of the love of parent for child, of man for God, of God for man, of love to one's neighbor and to the stranger, of husband for wife, of love for God's house, and for mercy and truth; but also of the love of Samson for Delilah, of Hosea for his adulterous wife, of Amnon's love for Tamar, of Solomon's love for strange women, of loving a woman for her beauty. Also of loving vanity, unrighteousness, devouring words, cursing, death, silver. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The noun ἀγάπη , oClass., was apparently created by the lxx, although it is found there only 19 times. It first comes into habitual use in Christian writings. In N.T. it is, practically, the only noun for love, although compound nouns expressing peculiar phases of love, as brotherly love, love of money, love of children, etc., are formed with φίλος , as φιλαδελφία, φιλαργυρία, φιλανθρωπία . Both verbs, φιλεῖν and ἀγαπᾶν occur, but ἀγαπᾶν more frequently. The attempt to carry out consistently the classical distinction between these two must be abandoned. Both are used of the love of parents and children, of the love of God for Christ, of Christ for men, of God for men, of men for Christ and of men for men. The love of man for God and of husband for wife, only ἀγαπᾶν . The distinction is rather between ἀγαπᾶν and ἐπιθυμεῖν than between ἀγαπᾶν and φιλεῖν . Love, in this passage, is that fruit of the Spirit which dominates all the others. See Galatians 5:13, Galatians 5:14. Comp. 1 Corinthians 13:1-13; 1 John 2:5, 1 John 2:9-11; 1 John 3:11, 1 John 3:14-16; 1 John 4:7-11, 1 John 4:16-21; 1 John 5:1-3. [source]
The full knowledge. Not identical with faith, since the article puts it as a distinct conception; but related to faith. Compare Philemon 3:9, Philemon 3:10; 1 John 4:16. “Christians are not to be informed merely on different sections of truth and erring through defective information on other points, but they are to be characterized by the completeness and harmony of their ideas of the power, work, history, and glory of the Son of God” (Eadie). [source]
Rev., consolation. Only here in the New Testament. From παρά besideand μῦθος speechor word. Παρὰ has the same force as in παράκλησις exhortation(see on Luke 6:24); a word which comes to the side of one to stimulate or comfort him; hence an exhortation, an encouragement. So Plato: “Let this, then, be our exhortation concerning marriage” (“Laws,” 773). A motive of persuasion or dissuasion. Plato, speaking of the fear of disgrace, or of ill-repute, says. “The obedient nature will readily yield to such incentives ” (“Laws,” 880). Also an assuagement or abatement. So Sophocles: “Offspring of the noble, ye are come as the assuagement of my woes” (“Electra,” 130). Plato: “They say that to the rich are many consolations ” (“Republic,” 329). Plato also calls certain fruits stimulants ( παραμυθία ) of a sated appetite (“Critias,” 115). Here in the sense of incentive. As related to exhortation, exhortation uses incentive as a ground of appeal. Christ exhorts, appealing to love. Compare Phlippians 1:9sqq. See Romans 5:8; 1 Corinthians 13:4; 2 Corinthians 5:14; Galatians 5:13; Ephesians 5:2; 1 John 4:16, etc. The two verbs kindred to exhortation and incentive occur together at 1 Thessalonians 2:11. See on 1 Corinthians 14:3. Render here, if any incentive of love. [source]
A general exhortation, not confined to prophesyings; but Paul elsewhere insists that a test be applied to phenomena which claim to be supernatural. See on discerning of spirits, 1 Corinthians 12:10; see on 1 Corinthians 14:29, and comp. 2 Thessalonians 2:2, and 1 John 4:1-3. For δοκιμάζετε prove, see on 1 Peter 1:7. In lxx, Proverbs 27:21; Psalm 11:6, δοκίμιον is a crucible or furnace. [source]
The word is a noun, meaning a gift. See John 4:10; Acts 2:38; Romans 5:15. The accusative often adverbially as here; as a gift, gratis. Comp. Matthew 10:8; Romans 3:24; Revelation 21:6. [source]
One of Paul‘s characteristic words (Romans 1:16). Of love (σωπρονισμου agapēs). One of the gifts of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22). “Which drives out fear” (Lock) as in 1 John 4:18. Of discipline Late Koiné{[28928]}š word (from σωπροσυνη sōphronizō to control), self-control, here only in N.T. See note on 1 Timothy 2:9 for sōphrosunē sa120 [source]
One of the gifts of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22). “Which drives out fear” (Lock) as in 1 John 4:18. [source]
Imperfect active of συνεργεω sunergeō old verb for which see Romans 8:28. Followed by associative-instrumental case εργοις ergois Faith cooperated with the deed of offering up Isaac.Was made perfect (ετελειωτη eteleiōthē). First aorist passive indicative of τελειοω teleioō to carry to the end, to complete like love in 1 John 4:18. See James 1:4 for τελειον εργον teleion ergon f0). [source]
First aorist passive indicative of τελειοω teleioō to carry to the end, to complete like love in 1 John 4:18. See James 1:4 for τελειον εργον teleion ergon f0). [source]
Old word for spring (John 4:14). [source]
Kindred with δοκίμιον , proof, and better rendered by Rev., proved. The verb is used in classical Greek of assaying or testing metals, and means, generally, to approve or sanction upon test. It is radically akin to δέχεσθαι , to receive, and hence implies a proof with a view to determine whether a thing be worthy to be received. Compare 1 Corinthians 3:13; Galatians 6:4; 1 John 4:1. It thus differs from πειράζειν , to try or tempt (see on πειρασμοῖς , 1 Peter 1:6), in that that verb indicates simply a putting to proof to discover what good or evil is in a person; and from the fact that such scrutiny so often develops the existence and energy of evil, the word acquired a predominant sense of putting to the proof with the design or hope of breaking down the subject under the proof - in other words, of temptation in the ordinary sense. Hence Satan is called ὁ πειράζων , the tempter, Matthew 4:3; 1 Thessalonians 3:5. See on Matthew 6:13. Archbishop Trench observes that “ δοκιμάζειν could not be used of Satan, since he never proves that he may approve, nor tests that he may accept.” [source]
Not perfected, as 1 John 4:17but perfect as the result of having been perfected. Compare Hebrews 5:14; James 1:4; James 3:2. [source]
John's characteristic appeal to Christian knowledge. Compare 1 John 2:20, 1 John 2:21; 1 John 4:2, 1 John 4:14, 1 John 4:16; 1 John 5:15, 1 John 5:18; 3 John 1:12. [source]
To abide in God is a more common expression with John than to be in God, and marks an advance in thought. The phrase is a favorite one with John. See John 15:4sqq.; John 6:56; 1 John 2:24, 1 John 2:27, 1 John 2:28; 1 John 3:6, 1 John 3:24; 1 John 4:12sq.; 1 John 4:15sq. Bengel notes the gradation in the three phrases “to know Him, to be in Him, to abide in Him; knowledge, fellowship, constancy.” [source]
An obligation, put as a debt. See Luke 17:10, and on debts, Matthew 6:12. The word expresses a special, personal obligation, and not as δεῖ mustan obligation in the nature of things. See John 20:9, and compare 1 John 3:16; 1 John 4:11; 3 John 1:8. [source]
Lit., in this. Characteristic of John. See John 8:35; John 15:8; John 16:30; 1 John 2:5; 1 John 3:24; 1 John 4:13; 1 John 5:2; 1 John 3:16; 1 John 3:19; 1 John 4:2. The expression points to what follows, “if we keep His commandments,” yet with a covert reference to that idea as generally implied in the previous words concerning fellowship with God and walking in the light. [source]
The sins of (A. V., italicized) should be omitted; as in Revelation, for the whole world. Compare 1 John 4:14; John 4:42; John 7:32. “The propitiation is as wide as the sin” (Bengel). If men do not experience its benefit, the fault is not in its efficacy. Düsterdieck (cited by Huther) says, “The propitiation has its real efficacy for the whole world; to believers it brings life, to unbelievers death.” Luther: “It is a patent fact that thou too art a part of the whole world; so that thine heart cannot deceive itself, and think, the Lord died for Peter and Paul, but not for me.” On κόσμου see on John 1:9. [source]
Not, we with God and God with us, but with our brethren. Fellowship with God exhibits and proves itself by fellowship with Christians. See 1 John 4:7, 1 John 4:12; 1 John 3:11, 1 John 3:23. [source]
To what does this refer? Two explanations are given. (1.) To the following that we may have boldness. So Huther, who argues thus on the ground that 1 John 4:18shows that the drift of the writer's thought is toward the fearlessness of love. According to this, therefore, love has its fulfillment in freeing us from fear, and inspiring us with boldness even in view of the final judgment. (2.) To what precedes, viz., our dwelling in God and He in us. So Westcott: “The fellowship of God with man and of man with God, carries with it the consummation of love.” I prefer the latter, principally on the ground that in such phrases as ἐν τούτῳ inthis, διὰ τοῦτο onthis account, therefore, the pronoun usually refers to something preceding, though more fully developed in what follows. See John 5:16, John 5:18; John 6:65; John 8:47; John 10:17; John 12:18; John 16:15. [source]
See on John 21:1. Including Christ's whole life on earth and its consequences. The idea of manifestation here assumes the fact of a previous being. John various terms to describe the incarnation. He conceives it with reference to the Father, as a sending, a mission. Hence ὁ πέμψας με Hethat sent me (John 4:34; John 6:38; John 9:4; John 12:44, etc.): ὁ πέμψας με πατήρ theFather that sent me (John 5:37; John 8:18; John 12:49, etc.): with the verb ἀποστέλλω tosend as an envoy, with a commission; God sent ( ἀπέστειλεν ) His Son (John 3:17; John 10:36; 1 John 4:10; compare John 6:57; John 7:29; John 17:18). With reference to the Son, as a coming, regarded as a historic fact and as an abiding fact. As a historic event, He came ( ἧλθεν , John 1:11); this is He that came ( ὁ ἐλθὼν , 1 John 5:6). Came forth ( ἐξῆλθον ; John 8:42; John 16:27, John 16:28; John 17:8). As something abiding in its effects, am come, hath come, is come, marked by the perfect tense: Light is come ( ἐλήλυθεν , John 3:19). Jesus Christ is come ( ἐληλυθότα , 1 John 4:2). Compare John 5:43; John 12:46; John 18:37). In two instances with ἥκω Iam come, John 8:42; 1 John 5:20. Or with the present tense, as describing a coming realized at the moment: whence I come ( ἔρχομαι , John 8:14); compare John 14:3, John 14:18, John 14:28; also Jesus Christ coming ( ἐρχόμενον , 2 John 1:7). With reference to the form: in flesh ( σάρξ ). See John 1:14; 1 John 4:2; 2 John 1:7. With reference to men, Christ was manifested (1 John 1:2; 1 John 3:5, 1 John 3:8; John 1:31; John 21:1, John 21:14).|To take away ( ἵνα ἄρῃ )|See on John 1:29.|Our sins ( τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν )|Omit ἡυῶν ourCompare John 1:29, τὴν ἁμαρτίαν , the sin. The plural here regards all that is contained in the inclusive term the sin: all manifestations or realizations of sin.|In Him is no sin ( ἁμαρτία ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν )|Lit., in Him sin is not. He is essentially and forever without sin. Compare John 7:18.| [source]
Rev., boldness. For the phrase have boldness, see 1 John 3:21; 1 John 4:17; 1 John 5:14; Hebrews 3:6; Hebrews 10:19; Philemon 1:8. For the word παῤῥησία boldnesssee on John 7:13; see on Acts 2:29. It is opposed, as here, to αἰσχύνομαι tobe ashamed, in Proverbs 13:5, where the Septuagint reads “a wicked man is ashamed ( αἰσχύνεται ) and shall not have boldness ( παῤῥησίαν ). Also in Philemon 1:20. Compare 2 Corinthians 3:12. The idea of free, open speech lies at the bottom of the word: coming before God's bar with nothing to conceal. The thought is embodied in the general confession of the Book of Common Prayer: “That we should not dissemble nor cloke them before the face of Almighty God our Heavenly Father, but confess them.” So John Wesley's Hymn:“Jesus, Thy blood and righteousnessMy beauty are, my glorious dress: 'Midst flaming worlds, in these arrayed,-DIVIDER- With joy shall I lift up my head.Bold shall I stand in Thy great day,For who aught to my charge shall lay? Fully absolved through these I am, - From sin and fear, from guilt and shame.” [source]
Only here and 1 John 4:10. From ἱλάσκομαι toappease, to conciliate to one's self, which occurs Luke 18:13; Hebrews 2:17. The noun means originally an appeasing or propitiating, and passes, through Alexandrine usage, into the sense of the means of appeasing, as here. The construction is to be particularly noted; for, in the matter of ( περί ) our sins; the genitive case of that for which propitiation is made. In Hebrews 2:17, the accusative case, also of the sins to be propitiated. In classical usage, on the other hand, the habitual construction is the accusative (direct objective case), of the person propitiated. So in Homer, of the gods. Θεὸν ἱλάσκεσθαι is to make a God propitious to one. See “Iliad,” i., 386,472. Of men whom one wishes to conciliate by divine honors after death. So Herodotus, of Philip of Crotona. “His beauty gained him honors at the hands of the Egestaeans which they never accorded to any one else; for they raised a hero-temple over his grave, and they still propitiate him ( αὐτὸν ἱλάσκονται ) with sacrifices” (v., 47). Again, “The Parians, having propitiated Themistocles ( Θεμιστοκλέα ἱλασάμενοι ) with gifts, escaped the visits of the army” (viii., 112). The change from this construction shows, to quote Canon Westcott, “that the scriptural conception of the verb is not that of appeasing one who is angry, with a personal feeling, against the offender; but of altering the character of that which, from without, occasions a necessary alienation, and interposes an inevitable obstacle to fellowship. Such phrases as 'propitiating God,' and God 'being reconciled' are foreign to the language of the New Testament. Man is reconciled (2 Corinthians 5:18sqq.; Romans 5:10sq.). There is a propitiation in the matter of the sin or of the sinner.” [source]
Late substantive from ιλασκομαι hilaskomai (Luke 18:13; Hebrews 2:17), in lxx, Philo, Plutarch, in N.T. only here and 1 John 4:10. Christ himself is the means of propitiation for It is possible to supply the ellipsis here of των αμαρτιων tōn hamartiōn (the sins of) as we have it in Hebrews 7:27, but a simpler way is just to regard “the whole world” as a mass of sin (1 John 5:19). At any rate, the propitiation by Christ provides for salvation for all (Hebrews 2:9) if they will only be reconciled with God (2 Corinthians 5:19-21). [source]
See this phrase also in 1 John 2:5; 1 John 3:16, 1 John 3:19, 1 John 3:24; 1 John 4:2, 1 John 4:13; 1 John 5:2. That is explained by the εαν ean clause, “if we keep his commandments” (εαν τηρωμεν ean tērōmen condition of the third class, εαν ean with present active subjunctive, “if we keep on keeping”), the clause itself in apposition with τουτωι toutōi (locative case). [source]
Rev., rendering the perfect tense more closely, hath the love of God been perfected. The change in the form of this antithetic clause is striking. He who claims to know God, yet lives in disobedience, is a liar. We should expect as an offset to this: He that keepeth His commandments is of the truth; or, the truth is in him. Instead we have, “In him has the love of God been perfected.” In other words, the obedient child of God is characterized, not by any representative trait or quality of his own personality, but merely as the subject of the work of divine love: as the sphere in which that love accomplishes its perfect work. The phrase ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ Θεοῦ the love of God, may mean either the love which God shows, or the love of which God is the object, or the love which is characteristic of God whether manifested by Himself or by His obedient child through His Spirit. John's usage is not decisive like Paul's, according to which the love of God habitually means the love which proceeds from and is manifested by God. The exact phrase, the love of God or the love of the Father, is found in 1 John 3:16; 1 John 4:9, in the undoubted sense of the love of God to men. The same sense is intended in 1 John 3:1, 1 John 3:9, 1 John 3:16, though differently expressed. The sense is doubtful in 1 John 2:5; 1 John 3:17; 1 John 4:12. Men's love to God is clearly meant in 1 John 2:15; 1 John 5:3. The phrase occurs only twice in the Gospels (Luke 6:42; John 5:42), and in both cases the sense is doubtful. Some, as Ebrard, combine the two, and explain the love of God as the mutual relation of love between God and men. It is not possible to settle the point decisively, but I incline to the view that the fundamental idea of the love of God as expounded by John is the love which God has made known and which answers to His nature. In favor of this is the general usage of ἀγάπη lovein the New Testament, with the subjective genitive. The object is more commonly expressed by εἰς towardsor to. See 1 Thessalonians 3:12; Colossians 1:4; 1 Peter 4:8. Still stronger is John's treatment of the subject in ch. 4. Here we have, 1 John 4:9, the manifestation of the love of God in us ( ἐν ἡμῖν ) By our life in Christ and our love to God we are a manifestation of God's love. Directly following this is a definition of the essential nature of love. “In this is love; i.e., herein consists love: not that we have loved God, but that He loved us ” (1 John 4:10). Our mutual love is a proof that God dwells in us. God dwelling in us, His love is perfected in us (1 John 4:12). The latter clause, it would seem, must be explained according to 1 John 4:10. Then (1 John 4:16), “We have known and believed the love that God hath in us ” (see on John 16:22, on the phrase have love ). “God is love;” that is His nature, and He imparts this nature to be the sphere in which His children dwell. “He that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God.” Finally, our love is engendered by His love to us. “We love Him because He first loved us” (1 John 4:19). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In harmony with this is John 15:9. “As the Father loved me, I also loved you. Continue ye in my love.” My love must be explained by I loved you. This is the same idea of divine love as the sphere or element of renewed being; and this idea is placed, as in the passage we are considering, in direct connection with the keeping of the divine commandments. “If ye keep my commandments ye shall abide in my love.”-DIVIDER- This interpretation does not exclude man's love to God. On the contrary, it includes it. The love which God has, is revealed as the love of God in the love of His children towards Him, no less than in His manifestations of love to them. The idea of divine love is thus complex. Love, in its very essence, is reciprocal. Its perfect ideal requires two parties. It is not enough to tell us, as a bare, abstract truth, that God is love. The truth must be rounded and filled out for us by the appreciable exertion of divine love upon an object, and by the response of the object. The love of God is perfected or completed by the perfect establishment of the relation of love between God and man. When man loves perfectly, his love is the love of God shed abroad in his heart. His love owes both its origin and its nature to the love of God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The word verily ( ἀληθῶς ) is never used by John as a mere formula of affirmation, but has the meaning of a qualitative adverb, expressing not merely the actual existence of a thing, but its existence in a manner most absolutely corresponding to ἀλήθεια truthCompare John 1:48; John 8:31. Hath been perfected. John is presenting the ideal of life in God. “This is the love of God that we keep His commandments.” Therefore whosoever keepeth God's word, His message in its entirety, realizes the perfect relation of love. [source]
Constative aorist active indicative summing up the life of Christ on earth with the emphatic use of the demonstrative εκεινος ekeinos in reference to Christ as in 1 John 3:3, 1 John 3:5, 1 John 3:7, 1 John 3:16; 1 John 4:17; John 7:11; John 9:12, John 9:28; John 19:21. [source]
First instance of this favourite form of address in these Epistles (1 John 3:2, 1 John 3:21; 1 John 4:1, 1 John 4:7; 3 John 1:1, 3 John 1:2, 3 John 1:5, 3 John 1:11). [source]
That is “God abides in him” as in 1 John 4:15. We abide in God and God abides in us through the Holy Spirit (John 14:10, John 14:17, John 14:23; John 17:21). “Therefore let God be a home to thee, and be thou the home of God: abide in God, and let God abide in thee” (Bede). [source]
Three times in this chapter (1 John 4:1, 1 John 4:7, 1 John 4:11) we have this tender address on love. [source]
Either present active indicative or imperative. The test of “the Spirit of God” (το πνευμα του τεου to pneuma tou theou) here alone in this Epistle, save 1 John 4:13. With the clamour of voices then and now this is important. The test (εν τουτωι en toutōi as in 1 John 3:19) follows. [source]
Perfect active indicative of νικαω nikaō calm confidence of final victory as in 1 John 2:13; John 16:33. The reference in αυτους autous (them) is to the false prophets in 1 John 4:1. [source]
Perfect active indicative of αποστελλω apostellō as again in 1 John 4:14, the permanent mission of the Son, though in 1 John 4:10 the aorist απεστειλεν apesteilen occurs for the single event. See John 3:16 for this great idea. [source]
Omit Christ. The human name, Jesus, shows that His blood is available for man. The divine name, His Son, shows that it is efficacious. I shall be rendering a service to students of John's Epistles by giving, in a condensed form, Canon Westcott's note, classifying the several names of our Lord and their uses in the Epistles. The name in John, as in the Bible elsewhere, has two distinct, but closely connected meanings. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 1. The Revelation of the Divine Being by a special title. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 2. The whole sum of the manifold revelations gathered up so as to form one supreme revelation. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The latter sense is illustrated in 3 John 1:7, where “the name” absolutely includes the essential elements of the Christian creed, the complete revelation of Christ's work in relation to God and man. Compare John 20:31; Acts 5:41. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In 1 John 2:12, the term is more limited, referring to Christ as He lived on earth and gave Himself for “the brethren.” In 1 John 3:23; 1 John 5:13, the exact sense is defined by what follows. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Actual Names Used. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (I.) His Son Jesus Christ. 1 John 1:3; 1 John 3:23; 1 John 5:20. The divine antecedent is differently described in each case, and the difference colors the phrase. In 1 John 1:2-3, the Father (compare 1John href="/desk/?q=1jo+3:23&sr=1">1 John 3:23, God. In 1 John 5:20, He that is true. Thus the sonship of Christ is regarded in relation to God as Father, as God, and as satisfying the divine ideal which man is able to form. The whole phrase, His Son Jesus Christ, includes the two elements of the confessions which John makes prominent. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 1. Jesus is the Son of God (John 4:15; John 5:5). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 2. Jesus is the Christ (John 2:22; John 5:1). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The constituents of the compressed phrase are all used separately by John. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (1.) Jesus. 1 John 2:22; 1 John 5:1; 1 John 4:3(where the correct reading omits Christ). The thought is that of the Lord in His perfect historic humanity. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (2.) Christ. 2 John 1:9. Pointing to the preparation made under the old covenant. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (3). Jesus Christ. 1 John 2:1; 1 John 5:6; 2 John 1:7. Combining the ideas of true humanity and messianic position. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In 1 John 4:15, the reading is doubtful: Jesus or Jesus Christ. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- On 1 John 4:2, see note. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (4.) The Son. 1 John 2:22, 1 John 2:23, 1 John 2:24; 1 John 4:14; 1 John 5:12. The absolute relation of Sonship to Fatherhood. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (5.) The Son of God. 1 John 3:8; 1 John 5:10, 1 John 5:12, 1 John 5:13, 1 John 5:20. Compare His Son (1 John 4:10; 1 John 5:9), where the immediate antecedent is ὁ Θεός Godand 1 John 5:18, He that was begotten of God. Combination of the ideas of Christ's divine dignity and divine sonship. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (6.) Jesus His (God's) Son. 1 John 1:7. Two truths. The blood of Christ is available and efficacious. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (7). His (God's) Son, His only Son. 1 John 4:9. The uniqueness of the gift is the manifestation of love. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The Son in various forms is eminently characteristic of the First and Second Epistles, in which it occurs more times than in all Paul's Epistles. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Κύριος Lordis not found in the Epistles (omit from 2 John 1:3), but occurs in the Gospel, and often in Revelation. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The expression, the blood of Jesus His Son, is chosen with a profound insight. Though Ignatius uses the phrase blood of God yet the word blood is inappropriate to the Son conceived in His divine nature. The word Jesus brings out His human nature, in which He assumed a real body of flesh and blood, which blood was shed for us.Cleanseth ( καθαρίζει )See on Mark 7:19. Not only forgives but removes. Compare Titus 2:14; Hebrews 9:13sq.; Hebrews 9:22sq.; Ephesians 5:26sq.; Matthew 5:8; 1 John 3:3. Compare also 1 John 1:9, where, forgive ( ἀφῇ ) and cleanse ( καθαρίσῃ ) occur, with an obvious difference of meaning. Note the present tense cleanseth. The cleansing is present and continuous. Alexander (Bishop of Derry) cites a striking passage from Victor Hugo (“Le Parricide”). The usurper Canute, who has had a share in his father's death, expiring after a virtuous and glorious reign, walks towards the light of heaven. But first he cuts with his sword a shroud of snow from the top of Mt. Savo. As he advances towards heaven, a cloud forms, and drop by drop his shroud is soaked with a rain of blood.All sin ( πάσης ἁμαρτίας )The principle of sin in all its forms and manifestations; not the separate manifestations. Compare all joy (James 1:2); all patience (2 Corinthians 7:12); all wisdom (Ephesians 1:8); all diligence (2 Peter 1:5). [source]
Third-class condition with εαν ean and the present active subjunctive, “if we keep on loving one another.”God abideth in us (ο τεος εν ημιν μενει ho theos en hēmin menei). Else we cannot go on loving one another.His love More than merely subjective or objective (1 John 2:5; 1 John 4:9). “Mutual love is a sign of the indwelling of God in men” (Brooke).Is perfected (τετελειωμενη εστιν teteleiōmenē estin). Periphrastic (see usual form τετελειωται teteleiōtai in 1 John 2:5; 1 John 4:17) perfect passive indicative of τελειοω teleioō (cf. 1 John 1:4). See 1 John 4:18 for “perfect love.” [source]
More than merely subjective or objective (1 John 2:5; 1 John 4:9). “Mutual love is a sign of the indwelling of God in men” (Brooke).Is perfected (τετελειωμενη εστιν teteleiōmenē estin). Periphrastic (see usual form τετελειωται teteleiōtai in 1 John 2:5; 1 John 4:17) perfect passive indicative of τελειοω teleioō (cf. 1 John 1:4). See 1 John 4:18 for “perfect love.” [source]
Periphrastic (see usual form τετελειωται teteleiōtai in 1 John 2:5; 1 John 4:17) perfect passive indicative of τελειοω teleioō (cf. 1 John 1:4). See 1 John 4:18 for “perfect love.” [source]
Perfect middle of τεαομαι theaomai as in 1 John 4:12, though the aorist in 1 John 1:1; John 1:14 John is qualified to bear witness (μαρτυρουμεν marturoumen as in 1 John 1:2) as Jesus had charged the disciples to do (Acts 1:8). [source]
A statement of the absolute nature of God. Not a light, nor the light, with reference to created beings, as the light of men, the light of the world, but simply and absolutely God is light, in His very nature. Compare God is spirit, and see on John 4:24: God is love, 1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16. The expression is not a metaphor. “All that we are accustomed to term light in the domain of the creature, whether with a physical or metaphysical meaning, is only an effluence of that one and only primitive Light which appears in the nature of God” (Ebrard). Light is immaterial, diffusive, pure, and glorious. It is the condition of life. Physically, it represents glory; intellectually, truth; morally, holiness. As immaterial it corresponds to God as spirit; as diffusive, to God as love; as the condition of life, to God as life; as pure and illuminating, to God as holiness and truth. In the Old Testament, light is often the medium of God's visible revelations to men. It was the first manifestation of God in creation. The burning lamp passed between the pieces of the parted victim in God's covenant with Abraham. God went before Israel in a pillar of fire, descended in fire upon Sinai, and appeared in the luminons cloud which rested on the mercy-seat in the most holy place. In classical Greek φῶς lightis used metaphorically for delight, deliverance, victory, and is applied to persons as a term of admiring affection, as we say that one is the light of our life, or the delight of our eyes. So Ulysses, on seeing his son Telemachus, says, “Thou hast come, Telemachus, sweet light ( γλυκερὸν φάος )” (Homer, “Odyssey,” xvi., 23). And Electra, greeting her returning brother, Orestes, “O dearest light ( φίλτατον φῶς )” (Sophocles, “Electra,” 1223). Occasionally, as by Euripides, of the light of truth (“Iphigenia at Tauris,” 1046). No modern writer has developed the idea of God as light with such power and beauty as Dante. His “Paradise” might truthfully be called a study of light. Light is the only visible expression of God. Radiating from Him, it is diffused through the universe as the principle of life. This key-note is struck at the very opening of “the Paradise.”“The glory of Him who moveth everythingDoth penetrate the universe, and shine In one part more and in another less. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Within that heaven which most His light receives-DIVIDER- Was I.”“Paradiso,” i., 1-5. In the final, beatific vision, God Himself is imagined as a luminous point which pours its rays through all the spheres, upon which the spirits gazed, and in which they read the past, the present, and the future.“O grace abundant, by which I presumedTo fix my sight upon the Light Eternal, So that the seeing I consumed therein!-DIVIDER- I saw that in its depth far down is lying-DIVIDER- Bound up with love together in one volume,-DIVIDER- What through the universe in leaves is scattered;-DIVIDER- Substance, and accident, and their operations,-DIVIDER- All interfused together in such wise-DIVIDER- That what I speak of is one simple light.”“Paradiso,” xxxiii., 82-90.“In presence of that light one such becomes, That to withdraw therefrom for other prospect-DIVIDER- It is impossible he e'er consent;-DIVIDER- Because the good, which object of will,-DIVIDER- Is gathered all in this, and out of it-DIVIDER- That is defective which is perfect there.”“Paradiso,” xxxiii., 100-105.“O Light eterne, sole in thyself that dwellest, Sole knowest thyself, and, know unto thyself-DIVIDER- And knowing, lovest and smilest on thyself!“Paradiso xxxiii., 124-126. Light enkindles love.“If in the heat of love I flame upon theeBeyond the measure that on earth is seen, So that the valor of thine eyes I vanquish,-DIVIDER- Marvel thou not thereat; for this proceeds-DIVIDER- From perfect sight, which, as it apprehends,-DIVIDER- To the good apprehended moves its feet. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Well I perceive how is already shining-DIVIDER- Into thine intellect the eternal Light,-DIVIDER- That only seen enkindles always love.”“Paradiso,” v., 1-9 See also “ Paradiso,” cantos xxx., xxxi. [source]
As in 1 John 4:9, though απεστειλεν apesteilen in 1 John 4:10.To be the Saviour of the world (σωτηρα του κοσμου sōtēra tou kosmou). Predicate accusative of σωτηρ sōtēr (Saviour), like ιλασμον hilasmon in 1 John 4:10. This very phrase occurs elsewhere only in John 4:42 as the confession of the Samaritans, but the idea is in John 3:17. [source]
Predicate accusative of σωτηρ sōtēr (Saviour), like ιλασμον hilasmon in 1 John 4:10. This very phrase occurs elsewhere only in John 4:42 as the confession of the Samaritans, but the idea is in John 3:17. [source]
In our case, not “among us” nor “to us.” Cf. Galatians 1:16.Hath sent (απεσταλκεν apestalken). Perfect active indicative of αποστελλω apostellō as again in 1 John 4:14, the permanent mission of the Son, though in 1 John 4:10 the aorist απεστειλεν apesteilen occurs for the single event. See John 3:16 for this great idea.His only-begotten Son “His Son the only-begotten” as in John 3:16. John applies μονογενης monogenēs to Jesus alone (John 1:14, John 1:18), but Luke (Luke 7:12; Luke 8:42; Luke 9:38) to others. Jesus alone completely reproduces the nature and character of God (Brooke).That we might live through him (ινα ζησωμεν δι αυτου hina zēsōmen di' autou). Purpose clause with ινα hina and the first aorist (ingressive, get life) active subjunctive of ζαω zaō “Through him” is through Christ, who is the life (John 14:6). Christ also lives in us (Galatians 2:20). This life begins here and now. [source]
Construed with the verb τετελειωται teteleiōtai (is perfected). In contrast to εν ημιν en hēmin (1 John 4:12, 1 John 4:16), emphasising cooperation. “God works with man” (Westcott). For boldness That is Christ as in 1 John 2:6; 1 John 3:3, 1 John 3:5, 1 John 3:7, 1 John 3:16. Same tense (present) as in 1 John 3:7. “Love is a heavenly visitant” (David Smith). We are in this world to manifest Christ. [source]
There is such a thing, perfect because it has been perfected (1 John 4:12, 1 John 4:17). Cf. James 1:4.Casteth out fear (εχω βαλλει τον ποβον exō ballei ton phobon). “Drives fear out” so that it does not exist in real love. See εκβαλλω εχω ekballō exō in John 6:37; John 9:34.; John 12:31; John 15:6 to turn out-of-doors, a powerful metaphor. Perfect love harbours no suspicion and no dread (1 Corinthians 13:1-13).Hath punishment Old word, in N.T. only here and Matthew 25:46. Τιμωρια Timōria has only the idea of penalty, κολασις kolasis has also that of discipline, while παιδεια paideia has that of chastisement (Hebrews 12:7). The one who still dreads Bengel graphically describes different types of men: “sine timore et amore; cum timore sine amore; cum timore et amore; sine timore cum amore ” [source]
Explanatory use of ινα hina with αυτη hautē as in John 17:3, to show what “the love of God” (1 John 4:9, 1 John 4:12) in the objective sense is, not mere declamatory boasting (1 John 4:20), but obedience to God‘s commands, “that we keep on keeping (present active subjunctive as in 1 John 2:3) his commandments.” This is the supreme test. [source]
Compare the plural, 1 John 3:2, 1 John 3:21; 1 John 4:1, 1 John 4:7, 1 John 4:11. [source]
See for this word 1 John 2:6; 1 John 3:16; 1 John 4:11. [source]
Aorist tense. There is no need of rendering it as a pluperfect. Rev., rightly, I heard and saw. The appeal to hearing and seeing is common to all John's writings. See John 1:14; John 19:35; John 21:14; 1 John 1:1, 1 John 1:2; 1 John 4:14. [source]
See John 4:10, John 4:14. Compare Isaiah 12:3. [source]
Rev., didst try. See on tried, 1 Peter 1:7; and compare 1 John 4:1; 1 Corinthians 12:10. [source]
The preposition ἐκ outof occurs one hundred and twenty-seven times in Revelation, and its proper signification is almost universally out of; but this rendering in many of the passages would be so strange and unidiomatic, that the New Testament Revisers have felt themselves able to adopt it only forty-one times out of all that number, and employ of, from, by, with, on, at, because of, by reason of, from among. See, for instance, Revelation 2:7, Revelation 2:21, Revelation 2:22; Revelation 6:4, Revelation 6:10; Revelation 8:11; Revelation 9:18; Revelation 14:13; Revelation 15:2; Revelation 16:21. Compare John 3:31; John 4:13, John 6:13, John 6:39, John 6:51; John 8:23, John 8:44; John 9:6; John 11:1; John 12:3, John 12:27, John 12:32; John 17:5. Tree, lit., wood. See on Luke 23:31; see on 1 Peter 2:24. Dean Plumptre notes the fact that, prominent as this symbol had been in the primeval history, it had remained unnoticed in the teaching where we should most have looked for its presence - in that of the Psalmist and Prophets of the Old Testament. Only in the Proverbs of Solomon had it been used, in a sense half allegorical and half mystical (Proverbs 3:18; Proverbs 13:12; Proverbs 11:30; Proverbs 15:4). The revival of the symbol in Revelation is in accordance with the theme of the restitution of all things. “The tree which disappeared with the disappearance of the earthly Paradise, reappears with the reappearance of the heavenly.” To eat of the tree of life expresses participation in the life eternal. The figure of the tree of life appears in all mythologies from India to Scandinavia. The Rabbins and Mohammedans called the vine the probation tree. The Zend Avesta has its tree of life called the Death-Destroyer. It grows by the waters of life, and the drinking of its sap confers immortality. The Hindu tree of life is pictured as growing out of a great seed in the midst of an expanse of water. It has three branches, each crowned with a sun, denoting the three powers of creation, preservation, and renovation after destruction. In another representation Budha sits in meditation under a tree with three branches, each branch having three stems. One of the Babylonian cylinders discovered by Layard, represents three priestesses gathering the fruit of what seems to be a palm-tree with three branches on each side. Athor, the Venus of the Egyptians, appears half-concealed in the branches of the sacred peach-tree, giving to the departed soul the fruit, and the drink of heaven from a vial from which the streams of life descend upon the spirit, a figure at the foot of the tree, like a hawk, with a human head and with hands outstretched. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In the Norse mythology a prominent figure is Igdrasil, the Ash-tree of Existence; its roots in the kingdom of Eels or Death, its trunk reaching to heaven, and its boughs spread over the whole universe. At its foot, in the kingdom of Death, sit three Nornas or Fates, the Past, the Present, and the Future, watering its roots from the sacred well. Compare Revelation 22:2, Revelation 22:14, Revelation 22:19. Virgil, addressing Dante at the completion of the ascent of the Purgatorial Mount, says:“That apple sweet, which through so many branchesThe care of mortals goeth in pursuit of, Today shall put in peace thy hungerings.”“Purgatorio,” xxvii., 115-117. ParadiseSee on Luke 23:43. Omit in the midst of. Παράδεισος Paradise“passes through a series of meanings, each one higher than the last. From any garden of delight, which is its first meaning, it comes to be predominantly applied to the garden of Eden, then to the resting-place of separate souls in joy and felicity, and lastly to the very heaven itself; and we see eminently in it, what we see indeed in so many words, how revealed religion assumes them into her service, and makes them vehicles of far higher truth than any which they knew at first, transforming and transfiguring them, as in this case, from glory to glory” (Trench). [source]
First aorist active indicative of τους λεγοντας εαυτους αποστολους peirazō to test, a reference to a recent crisis when these Nicolaitans (Revelation 2:6) were condemned. The present tenses (και ουκ εισιν dunēiκαι ουκ οντας echeis) indicate the continuance of this attitude. Cf. 1 John 4:1. [source]
Second aorist active infinitive of εστιω esthiō the tree of life Note εκ ek with the ablative with παγειν phagein like our “eat of” (from or part of). From Genesis 2:9; Genesis 3:22. Again in Revelation 22:2, Revelation 22:14 as here for immortality. This tree is now in the Garden of God. For the water of life see Revelation 21:6; Revelation 22:17 (Cf. John 4:10, John 4:13.). [source]
God is the bountiful Giver (James 1:5, James 1:17) of the Water of Life. See Revelation 7:17; Revelation 22:1, Revelation 22:17 for this metaphor, which is based on Isaiah 55:1. It is God‘s own promise For this partitive use of εκ ek see Matthew 25:8, without εκ ek Revelation 2:17.Freely See Matthew 10:8; John 4:10; Romans 3:24; Acts 8:20; Revelation 22:17. [source]
See Matthew 10:8; John 4:10; Romans 3:24; Acts 8:20; Revelation 22:17. [source]
Present active predicate participles feminine accusative singular agreeing with ην hēn (object of ηκουσα ēkousa), not with πωνη phōnē (nominative) as most of the cursives have it Ordinarily it would be ελαλει και ελεγεν elalei kai elegen See Revelation 4:1 for like idiom. This is the voice mentioned in Revelation 10:4. No great distinction is to be made here between λαλεω laleō and λεγω legō take Present active imperative of υπαγω hupagō and second aorist active imperative of λαμβανω lambanō The use of υπαγε hupage (exclamation like ιδε ide) is common in N.T. (Matthew 5:24; Matthew 8:4; Matthew 19:21; John 4:16; John 9:7). Charles calls it a Hebraism (Revelation 16:1). Note the repeated article here (το to) referring to the open book in the hand of the angel (Revelation 10:2), only here βιβλιον biblion is used, not the diminutive of βιβλαριδιον biblaridion of Revelation 10:2, Revelation 10:9, Revelation 10:10. [source]
The whole life and conduct as in John 6:29.And thy toil and patience (και τον κοπον και την υπομονην σου kai ton kopon kai tēn hupomonēn sou). “Both thy toil and patience,” in explanation of εργα erga and see 1 Thessalonians 1:3, where all three words (εργον κοποσ υπομονη ergonεργα koposκοποι hupomonē) occur together as here. See Revelation 14:13 for sharp distinction between υπομονη erga (activities) and κοπος kopoi (toils, with weariness). Endurance (και οτι hupomonē) in hard toil (κοπος kopos).And that Further explanation of δυνασαι kopos (hard toil).Not able (βαστασαι ou dunēi). This Koiné form for the Attic βασταζω dunasai (second person singular indicative middle) occurs also in Mark 9:22; Luke 16:2.Bear First aorist active infinitive of πειραζω bastazō for which verb see John 10:31; John 12:6; Galatians 6:2. These evil men were indeed a heavy burden.And didst try (δυνηι εχεις kai epeirasas). First aorist active indicative of τους λεγοντας εαυτους αποστολους peirazō to test, a reference to a recent crisis when these Nicolaitans (Revelation 2:6) were condemned. The present tenses (και ουκ εισιν dunēiκαι ουκ οντας echeis) indicate the continuance of this attitude. Cf. 1 John 4:1.Which call themselves apostles Perhaps itinerant missionaries of these Nicolaitans who posed as equal to or even superior to the original apostles, like the Judaizers so described by Paul (2 Corinthians 11:5, 2 Corinthians 11:13; 2 Corinthians 12:11). Paul had foretold such false teachers (Gnostics), grievous wolves, in Acts 20:29; in sheep‘s clothing, Jesus had said (Matthew 7:15).And they are not (και ευρες kai ouk eisin). A parenthesis in Johannine style (John 2:9; John 3:9; 1 John 3:1) for ευρισκω kai ouk ontas to correspond to επειρασας legontas didst find (πσευδεις kai heures). Second aorist active indicative of πσευδης heuriskō Dropping back to the regular structure parallel with epeirasas (pseudeis). Predicate accusative plural of pseudēs self-deceived deceivers as in Revelation 21:8. [source]
Further explanation of δυνασαι kopos (hard toil).Not able (βαστασαι ou dunēi). This Koiné form for the Attic βασταζω dunasai (second person singular indicative middle) occurs also in Mark 9:22; Luke 16:2.Bear First aorist active infinitive of πειραζω bastazō for which verb see John 10:31; John 12:6; Galatians 6:2. These evil men were indeed a heavy burden.And didst try (δυνηι εχεις kai epeirasas). First aorist active indicative of τους λεγοντας εαυτους αποστολους peirazō to test, a reference to a recent crisis when these Nicolaitans (Revelation 2:6) were condemned. The present tenses (και ουκ εισιν dunēiκαι ουκ οντας echeis) indicate the continuance of this attitude. Cf. 1 John 4:1.Which call themselves apostles Perhaps itinerant missionaries of these Nicolaitans who posed as equal to or even superior to the original apostles, like the Judaizers so described by Paul (2 Corinthians 11:5, 2 Corinthians 11:13; 2 Corinthians 12:11). Paul had foretold such false teachers (Gnostics), grievous wolves, in Acts 20:29; in sheep‘s clothing, Jesus had said (Matthew 7:15).And they are not (και ευρες kai ouk eisin). A parenthesis in Johannine style (John 2:9; John 3:9; 1 John 3:1) for ευρισκω kai ouk ontas to correspond to επειρασας legontas didst find (πσευδεις kai heures). Second aorist active indicative of πσευδης heuriskō Dropping back to the regular structure parallel with epeirasas (pseudeis). Predicate accusative plural of pseudēs self-deceived deceivers as in Revelation 21:8. [source]
First aorist active infinitive of πειραζω bastazō for which verb see John 10:31; John 12:6; Galatians 6:2. These evil men were indeed a heavy burden.And didst try (δυνηι εχεις kai epeirasas). First aorist active indicative of τους λεγοντας εαυτους αποστολους peirazō to test, a reference to a recent crisis when these Nicolaitans (Revelation 2:6) were condemned. The present tenses (και ουκ εισιν dunēiκαι ουκ οντας echeis) indicate the continuance of this attitude. Cf. 1 John 4:1.Which call themselves apostles Perhaps itinerant missionaries of these Nicolaitans who posed as equal to or even superior to the original apostles, like the Judaizers so described by Paul (2 Corinthians 11:5, 2 Corinthians 11:13; 2 Corinthians 12:11). Paul had foretold such false teachers (Gnostics), grievous wolves, in Acts 20:29; in sheep‘s clothing, Jesus had said (Matthew 7:15).And they are not (και ευρες kai ouk eisin). A parenthesis in Johannine style (John 2:9; John 3:9; 1 John 3:1) for ευρισκω kai ouk ontas to correspond to επειρασας legontas didst find (πσευδεις kai heures). Second aorist active indicative of πσευδης heuriskō Dropping back to the regular structure parallel with epeirasas (pseudeis). Predicate accusative plural of pseudēs self-deceived deceivers as in Revelation 21:8. [source]
The Holy Spirit as in Revelation 14:13; Revelation 22:17. Both Christ and the Holy Spirit deliver this message. “The Spirit of Christ in the prophet is the interpreter of Christ‘s voice” (Swete).To him that overcometh (τωι νικωντι tōi nikōnti). Dative of the present (continuous victory) active articular participle of νικαω nikaō a common Johannine verb (John 16:33; 1 John 2:13; 1 John 4:4; 1 John 5:4.; Revelation 2:7, Revelation 2:11, Revelation 2:17, Revelation 2:26; Revelation 3:5, Revelation 3:12, Revelation 3:21; Revelation 5:5; Revelation 12:11; Revelation 15:2; Revelation 17:14; Revelation 21:7). Faith is dominant in Paul, victory in John, faith is victory (1 John 5:4). So in each promise to these churches.I will give Future active of διδωμι didōmi as in Revelation 2:10, Revelation 2:17, Revelation 2:23, Revelation 2:26, Revelation 2:28; Revelation 3:8, Revelation 3:21; Revelation 6:4; Revelation 11:3; Revelation 21:6.To eat (παγειν phagein). Second aorist active infinitive of εστιω esthiō the tree of life (εκ του χυλου της ζωης ek tou xulou tēs zōēs). Note εκ ek with the ablative with παγειν phagein like our “eat of” (from or part of). From Genesis 2:9; Genesis 3:22. Again in Revelation 22:2, Revelation 22:14 as here for immortality. This tree is now in the Garden of God. For the water of life see Revelation 21:6; Revelation 22:17 (Cf. John 4:10, John 4:13.).Which The χυλον xulon (tree).In the Paradise of God (εν τωι παραδεισωι του τεου en tōi paradeisōi tou theou). Persian word, for which see Luke 23:43; 2 Corinthians 12:4. The abode of God and the home of the redeemed with Christ, not a mere intermediate state. It was originally a garden of delight and finally heaven itself (Trench), as here. [source]
Future active of διδωμι didōmi as in Revelation 2:10, Revelation 2:17, Revelation 2:23, Revelation 2:26, Revelation 2:28; Revelation 3:8, Revelation 3:21; Revelation 6:4; Revelation 11:3; Revelation 21:6.To eat (παγειν phagein). Second aorist active infinitive of εστιω esthiō the tree of life (εκ του χυλου της ζωης ek tou xulou tēs zōēs). Note εκ ek with the ablative with παγειν phagein like our “eat of” (from or part of). From Genesis 2:9; Genesis 3:22. Again in Revelation 22:2, Revelation 22:14 as here for immortality. This tree is now in the Garden of God. For the water of life see Revelation 21:6; Revelation 22:17 (Cf. John 4:10, John 4:13.).Which The χυλον xulon (tree).In the Paradise of God (εν τωι παραδεισωι του τεου en tōi paradeisōi tou theou). Persian word, for which see Luke 23:43; 2 Corinthians 12:4. The abode of God and the home of the redeemed with Christ, not a mere intermediate state. It was originally a garden of delight and finally heaven itself (Trench), as here. [source]
For υδωρ ζωης hudōr zōēs (water of life) see Revelation 7:17; Revelation 21:6; Revelation 22:17; John 4:14. There was a river in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:10). The metaphor of river reappears in Zechariah 14:8; Ezekiel 47:9, and the fountain of life in Joel 3:18; Jeremiah 2:13; Proverbs 10:11; Proverbs 13:14; Proverbs 14:27; Proverbs 16:22; Psalm 36:10.Bright as crystal (λαμπρον ως κρυσταλλον lampron hōs krustallon). See Revelation 4:6 for κρυσταλλον krustallon and Revelation 15:6; Revelation 19:8; Revelation 22:16 for λαμπρον lampron “Sparkling like rock crystal” (Swete), shimmering like mountain water over the rocks.Proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb Cf. Ezekiel 47:1; Zechariah 14:8. Already in Revelation 3:21 Christ is pictured as sharing the Father‘s throne as in Hebrews 1:3. See also Revelation 22:3. This phrase has no bearing on the doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit. [source]
“Shall shepherd them,” future active of ποιμαινω poimainō (from ποιμην poimēn shepherd), in John 21:16; Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2; Revelation 2:27; Revelation 7:17; Revelation 12:5; Revelation 19:15. Jesus is still the Good Shepherd of his sheep (John 10:11, John 10:14.). Cf. Psalm 23:1.Shall guide them (οδη γησει αυτους hodē gēsei autous). Future active of οδηγεω hodēgeō old word (from οδηγος hodēgos guide, Matthew 15:14), used of God‘s guidance of Israel (Exodus 15:13), of God‘s guidance of individual lives (Psalm 5:9), of the guidance of the Holy Spirit (John 16:13), of Christ‘s own guidance here (cf. John 14:4; Revelation 14:4).Unto fountains of waters of life The language is like that in Isaiah 49:10; Jeremiah 2:13. Note the order, “to life‘s water springs” (Swete) like the Vulgate ad vitae fontes aquarum, with emphasis on ζωης zōēs (life‘s). For this idea see also John 4:12, John 4:14; John 7:38.; Revelation 21:6; Revelation 22:1, Revelation 22:17. No special emphasis on the plural here or in Revelation 8:10; Revelation 14:7; Revelation 16:4.And God shall wipe away (και εχαλειπσει ο τεος kai exaleipsei ho theos). Repeated in Revelation 21:4 from Isaiah 25:8. Future active of εχαλειπω exaleiphō old compound, to wipe out (εχ ex), off, away, already in Revelation 3:5 for erasing a name and in Acts 3:19 for removing the stain (guilt) of sin.Every tear Old word, with other form, δακρυ dakru in Luke 7:38, Luke 7:44. Note repetition of εκ ek with οπταλμων ophthalmōn (out of their eyes). “Words like these of Revelation 7:15-17 must sound as a divine music in the ears of the persecuted. God will comfort as a mother comforts” (Baljon). [source]
The language is like that in Isaiah 49:10; Jeremiah 2:13. Note the order, “to life‘s water springs” (Swete) like the Vulgate ad vitae fontes aquarum, with emphasis on ζωης zōēs (life‘s). For this idea see also John 4:12, John 4:14; John 7:38.; Revelation 21:6; Revelation 22:1, Revelation 22:17. No special emphasis on the plural here or in Revelation 8:10; Revelation 14:7; Revelation 16:4.And God shall wipe away (και εχαλειπσει ο τεος kai exaleipsei ho theos). Repeated in Revelation 21:4 from Isaiah 25:8. Future active of εχαλειπω exaleiphō old compound, to wipe out (εχ ex), off, away, already in Revelation 3:5 for erasing a name and in Acts 3:19 for removing the stain (guilt) of sin.Every tear Old word, with other form, δακρυ dakru in Luke 7:38, Luke 7:44. Note repetition of εκ ek with οπταλμων ophthalmōn (out of their eyes). “Words like these of Revelation 7:15-17 must sound as a divine music in the ears of the persecuted. God will comfort as a mother comforts” (Baljon). [source]
Perfect active participle of πιπτω piptō already down. In Luke 10:18 note πεσοντα pesonta (constative aorist active, like a flash of lightning) after ετεωρουν etheōroun and in Revelation 7:2 note αναβαινοντα anabainonta (present active and linear, coming up, picturing the process) after ειδον eidon the pit of the abyss Αβυσσος Abussos is an old adjective (alpha privative and βυτος buthos depth, without depth), but η αβυσσος hē abussos (supply χωρα chōra place), the bottomless place. It occurs in Romans 10:7 for the common receptacle of the dead for Hades (Sheol), but in Luke 8:31 a lower depth is sounded (Swete), for the abode of demons, and in this sense it occurs in Revelation 9:1, Revelation 9:2, Revelation 9:11; Revelation 11:7; Revelation 17:8; Revelation 20:1, Revelation 20:3. Πρεαρ Phrear is an old word for well or cistern (Luke 14:5; John 4:11.) and it occurs in Revelation 9:1. for the mouth of the abyss which is pictured as a cistern with a narrow orifice at the entrance and this fifth angel holds the key to it. [source]