KJV: Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
YLT: Simon the Cananite, and Judas Iscariot, who did also deliver him up.
Darby: Simon the Cananaean, and Judas the Iscariote, who also delivered him up.
ASV: Simon the Cananaean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
| Σίμων | Simon |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Σίμων Sense: Peter was one of the apostles. |
|
| Καναναῖος | Zealot |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Καναναῖος Sense: the surname of apostle Simon, otherwise known as “Simon Zelotes”. |
|
| Ἰούδας | Judas |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Ἰούδας Sense: the fourth son of Jacob. |
|
| ὁ | - |
|
Parse: Article, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| Ἰσκαριώτης | Iscariot |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Ἰσκαριώθ Sense: the apostle who betrayed Jesus. |
|
| ὁ | the [one] |
|
Parse: Article, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| καὶ | also |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: καί Sense: and, also, even, indeed, but. |
|
| παραδοὺς | having betrayed |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Participle Active, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: παραδίδωμι Sense: to give into the hands (of another). |
|
Greek Commentary for Matthew 10:4
Rev., Cananaean. The word has nothing to do with Canaan. In Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13, the same apostle is called Zelotes. Both terms indicate his connection with the Galilaean Zealot party, a sect which stood for the recovery of Jewish freedom and the maintenance of distinctive Jewish institutions. From the Hebrew kannázealous; compare the Chaldee kanánby which this sect was denoted. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Matthew 10:4
This paradox appears in four forms according to Allen (1) Matthew 10:39 (2) Mark 8:35; Matthew 16:25; Luke 9:24 (3) Luke 17:33 (4) John 12:25. The Wisdom of Sirach (Hebrew text) in 51:26 has: “He that giveth his life findeth her (wisdom).” It is one of the profound sayings of Christ that he repeated many times. Plato (Gorgias 512) has language somewhat similar though not so sharply put. The article and aorist participles here (ο ευρων ο απολεσας ho heurōn ο δεχομενος ho apolesas) are timeless in themselves just like ho dechomenos in Matthew 10:40 and Matthew 10:41. [source]
“Because he is a prophet” (Moffatt). In an Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 37 (a.d. 49) we find ονοματι ελευτερου onomati eleutherou in virtue of being free-born. “He that receiveth a prophet from no ulterior motive, but simply qua prophet (ut prophetam, Jer.) would receive a reward in the coming age equal to that of his guest” (McNeile). The use of εις eis here is to be noted. In reality εις eis is simply εν en with the same meaning. It is not proper to say that εις eis has always to be translated “into.” Besides these examples of εις ονομα eis onoma in Matthew 10:41 and Matthew 10:42 see note on Matthew 12:41 εις το κηρυγμα Ιωνα eis to kērugma Iōnā (see Robertson‘s Grammar, p. 593). [source]
For “one such little child” (ανψ βελιεςερ ιν Χριστ any believer in Christ) Luke (Luke 9:48) has “this little child” as a representative or symbol. “On the basis or ground of my name,” “for my sake.” Very much like εις ονομα eis onoma in Matthew 10:41 which does not differ greatly from εν ονοματι en onomati (Acts 10:48). [source]
Not just the Jews scattered among the Gentiles, but the Gentiles themselves in every land. And not by making Jews of them, though this point is not made plain here. It will take time for the disciples to grow into this Magna Charta of the missionary propaganda. But here is the world program of the Risen Christ and it should not be forgotten by those who seek to foreshorten it all by saying that Jesus expected his second coming to be very soon, even within the lifetime of those who heard. He did promise to come, but he has never named the date. Meanwhile we are to be ready for his coming at any time and to look for it joyfully. But we are to leave that to the Father and push on the campaign for world conquest. This program includes making disciples or learners (ματητευσατε mathēteusate) such as they were themselves. That means evangelism in the fullest sense and not merely revival meetings. Baptism in (εις eis not into) the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in the name of the Trinity. Objection is raised to this language in the mouth of Jesus as too theological and as not a genuine part of the Gospel of Matthew for the same reason. See note on Matthew 11:27, where Jesus speaks of the Father and the Son as here. But it is all to no purpose. There is a chapter devoted to this subject in my The Christ of the Logia in which the genuineness of these words is proven. The name of Jesus is the essential part of it as is shown in the Acts. Trine immersion is not taught as the Greek Church holds and practices, baptism in the name of the Father, then of the Son, then of the Holy Spirit. The use of name (ονομα onoma) here is a common one in the Septuagint and the papyri for power or authority. For the use of εις eis with ονομα onoma in the sense here employed, not meaning into, See note on Matthew 10:41. (cf. also Matthew 12:41). [source]
Properly, Cananaean. See on Matthew 10:4: “No name is more striking in the list than that of Simon the Zealot, for to none of the twelve could the contrast be so vivid between their former and their new position. What revolution of thought and heart could be greater than that which had thus changed into a follower of Jesus one of the fierce war-party of the day, which looked on the presence of Rome in the Holy Land as treason against the majesty of Jehovah, a party who were fanatical in their Jewish strictures and exclusiveness?” (Geikie, “Life and Words of Christ”). [source]
Heralded a repentance kind of baptism (genitive case, genus case), a baptism marked by repentance. See note on Matthew 3:2 for discussion of repent, an exceedingly poor rendering of John‘s great word metanoias He called upon the Jews to change their minds and to turn from their sins, “confessing their sins” See note on Matthew 3:6. The public confessions produced a profound impression as they would now.Unto remission of sins (μετανοιας eis aphesin hamartiōn). This is a difficult phrase to translate accurately. Certainly John did not mean that the baptism was the means of obtaining the forgiveness of their sins or necessary to the remission of sins. The trouble lies in the use of εχομολογουμενοι τας αμαρτιας αυτων eis which sometimes is used when purpose is expressed, but sometimes when there is no such idea as in Matthew 10:41 and Matthew 12:41. Probably “with reference to” is as good a translation here as is possible. The baptism was on the basis of the repentance and confession of sin and, as Paul later explained (Romans 6:4), was a picture of the death to sin and resurrection to new life in Christ. This symbol was already in use by the Jews for proselytes who became Jews. John is treating the Jewish nation as pagans who need to repent, to confess their sins, and to come back to the kingdom of God. The baptism in the Jordan was the objective challenge to the people. [source]
This is a difficult phrase to translate accurately. Certainly John did not mean that the baptism was the means of obtaining the forgiveness of their sins or necessary to the remission of sins. The trouble lies in the use of εχομολογουμενοι τας αμαρτιας αυτων eis which sometimes is used when purpose is expressed, but sometimes when there is no such idea as in Matthew 10:41 and Matthew 12:41. Probably “with reference to” is as good a translation here as is possible. The baptism was on the basis of the repentance and confession of sin and, as Paul later explained (Romans 6:4), was a picture of the death to sin and resurrection to new life in Christ. This symbol was already in use by the Jews for proselytes who became Jews. John is treating the Jewish nation as pagans who need to repent, to confess their sins, and to come back to the kingdom of God. The baptism in the Jordan was the objective challenge to the people. [source]
“When he might have been saved” (Bengel). This word, in classical Greek, is used: 1. Of death in battle or elsewhere. 2. Of laying waste, as a city or heritage. 3. Of losing of life, property, or other objects. As an active verb, to kill or demolish. 4. Of being demoralized, morally abandoned or ruined, as children under bad influences. In New Testament of killing (Matthew 2:13; Matthew 12:14). 5. Of destroying and perishing, not only of human life, but of material and intellectual things (1 Corinthians 1:19; John 6:27; Mark 2:22; 1 Peter 1:7; James 1:11; Hebrews 1:11). 6. Of losing (Matthew 10:6, Matthew 10:42; Luke 15:4, Luke 15:6, Luke 15:8). Of moral abandonment (Luke 15:24, Luke 15:32). 7. Of the doom of the impenitent (Matthew 10:28; Luke 13:3; John 3:15; John 10:28; 2 Peter 3:9; Romans 2:12. [source]
Distinguished by Matthew and Hark as the Cananaean. See on Matthew 10:4; and Mark 3:18. [source]
Note this use of εις eis as in Matthew 10:41; Matthew 12:41. Luke inserts the words about the Queen of the South (Luke 11:31) in between the discussion of Jonah (Luke 11:29., Luke 11:32). Both Σολομωνος Solomōnos (Luke 11:31) and Ιωνα Iōnā (Luke 11:32) are in the ablative case after the comparative πλειον pleion (more, something more). [source]
Imperfect active, the habit of “their fathers” (peculiar to both here). Matthew 5:12 has “persecuted.” Thus they will receive a prophet‘s reward (Matthew 10:41). [source]
First aorist active indicative of κραζω krazō to cry aloud, and second aorist active of defective verb ερω erō to say. This is probably a summary of what Jesus had already said as in John 12:36 John closes the public ministry of Jesus without the Synoptic account of the last day in the temple on our Tuesday (Mark 11:27-12:44; Matt 21:23-23:39; Luke 20:1-21:4). Not on me, but on him “Not on me only, but also on,” another example of exaggerated contrast like that in John 12:30. The idea of Jesus here is a frequent one (believing on Jesus whom the Father has sent) as in John 3:17.; John 5:23, John 5:30, John 5:43; John 7:16; John 8:42; John 13:20; John 14:1; Matthew 10:40; Luke 9:48. [source]
Periphrastic imperfect active. Perfective use of κατα kata to abide permanently. It is possible that this is the house of Mary the mother of John Mark where the disciples later met for prayer (Acts 12:12). Here alone in the N.T., though old compound. Some MSS. here read παραμενοντες paramenontes This could mean constant residence, but most likely frequent resort for prayer during these days, some being on hand all the time as they came and went. Simon the Zealot (Σιμον ο ηλωτης Simon ho Zēlōtēs). Called Simon the Cananaean (ο Χαναναιος ho Cananaios) in Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:18, but Zealot in Luke 6:16 as here giving the Greek equivalent of the Aramaic word because Luke has Gentiles in mind. The epithet (member of the party of Zealots) clung to him after he became an apostle and distinguishes him from Simon Peter. See note in Volume 1 on the Gospel of Matthew for discussion of the four lists of the apostles. Judas the son of James Literally, Judas of James, whether son or brother (cf. Judges 1:1) we do not really know. “Of James” is added to distinguish him from Judas Iscariot (John 14:22). However we take it, he must be identified with the Thaddaeus (=Lebbaeus) of Mark and Matthew to make the list in the third group identical. No name appears in Acts for that of Judas Iscariot. [source]
Called Simon the Cananaean (ο Χαναναιος ho Cananaios) in Matthew 10:4, Mark 3:18, but Zealot in Luke 6:16 as here giving the Greek equivalent of the Aramaic word because Luke has Gentiles in mind. The epithet (member of the party of Zealots) clung to him after he became an apostle and distinguishes him from Simon Peter. See note in Volume 1 on the Gospel of Matthew for discussion of the four lists of the apostles. [source]
About angels, see note on Acts 7:38. Διαταγη Diatagē (from διατασσω diatassō to arrange, appoint) occurs in late Greek, lxx, inscriptions, papyri, Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, pp. 89ff., and in N.T. only here and Romans 13:2. At (or as) the appointment of angels (cf. Matthew 10:41; Matthew 12:41 for this use of εις eis). And kept it not (και ουκ επυλαχατε kai ouk ephulaxate). Like a whipcracker these words cut to the quick. They gloried in possessing the law and openly violated it (Romans 2:23). [source]
In persecuting the disciples, Saul was persecuting Jesus, as the words of Jesus in Acts 9:5 made plain. Christ had already spoken of the mystic union between himself and his followers (Matthew 10:40; Matthew 25:40, Matthew 25:45; John 15:1-5). The proverb (Pindar) that Jesus quotes to Saul about kicking against the goad is genuine in Acts 26:14, but not here. [source]
Rather, “And let each one of you be baptized.” Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve. The first thing to do is make a radical and complete change of heart and life. Then let each one be baptized after this change has taken place, and the act of baptism be performed “in the name of Jesus Christ” In accordance with the command of Jesus in Matthew 28:19 No distinction is to be insisted on between εις το ονομα eis to onoma and εν τωι ονοματι en tōi onomati with βαπτιζω baptizō since εις eis and εν en are really the same word in origin. In Acts 10:48 εν τωι ονοματι Ιησου Χριστου en tōi onomati Iēsou Christou occurs, but εις eis to ονομα onoma in Acts 8:16; Acts 19:5. The use of ονομα onoma means in the name or with the authority of one as εις ονομα προπητου eis onoma prophētou (Matthew 10:41) as a prophet, in the name of a prophet. In the Acts the full name of the Trinity does not occur in baptism as in Matthew 28:19, but this does not show that it was not used. The name of Jesus Christ is the distinctive one in Christian baptism and really involves the Father and the Spirit. See note on Matthew 28:19 for discussion of this point. “Luke does not give the form of words used in baptism by the Apostles, but merely states the fact that they baptized those who acknowledged Jesus as Messiah or as Lord” (Page). Unto the remission of your sins (eis aphesin tōn hamartiōn hūmōn). This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of eis does exist as in 1 Corinthians 2:7 εις απεσιν των αμαρτιων μων eis doxan hēmōn (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of εις eis for aim or purpose. It is seen in Matthew 10:41 in three examples εις δοχαν ημων eis onoma prophētouεις dikaiouεις ονομα προπητου δικαιου ματητου mathētou where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in Matthew 12:41 about the preaching of Jonah (εις το κηρυγμα Ιωνα eis to kērugma Iōna). They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koiné{[28928]}š generally (Robertson, Grammar, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received. The gift of the Holy Ghost The gift consists (Acts 8:17) in the Holy Spirit (genitive of identification). [source]
This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of eis does exist as in 1 Corinthians 2:7 εις απεσιν των αμαρτιων μων eis doxan hēmōn (for our glory). But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of εις eis for aim or purpose. It is seen in Matthew 10:41 in three examples εις δοχαν ημων eis onoma prophētouεις dikaiouεις ονομα προπητου δικαιου ματητου mathētou where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in Matthew 12:41 about the preaching of Jonah They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koiné{[28928]}š generally (Robertson, Grammar, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received. [source]
The Hebrew form occurs also in Acts 22:7; Acts 26:14 where it is expressly stated that the voice was in the Hebrew (Aramaic) tongue as also in Acts 9:17 (Ananias). Deissmann (Bible Studies, p. 316) terms this use of με Saoul “the historian‘s sense of liturgical rhythm.” For the repetition of names by Jesus note Luke 10:41 (Martha, Martha), Luke 22:31 (Simon, Simon). Me (me). In persecuting the disciples, Saul was persecuting Jesus, as the words of Jesus in Acts 9:5 made plain. Christ had already spoken of the mystic union between himself and his followers (Matthew 10:40; Matthew 25:40, Matthew 25:45; John 15:1-5). The proverb (Pindar) that Jesus quotes to Saul about kicking against the goad is genuine in Acts 26:14, but not here. [source]
See on Matthew 4:12; see on 1 Peter 2:23. Used of casting into prison or delivering to justice, Matthew 4:12; Matthew 10:17, Matthew 19:21. Frequently of the betrayal of Christ, Matthew 10:4; Matthew 17:22; John 6:64, John 6:71. Of committing a trust, Matthew 25:14, Matthew 25:20, Matthew 25:22. Of committing tradition, doctrine, or precept, Mark 7:13; 1 Corinthians 11:2; 1 Corinthians 15:3; Romans 6:17; 2 Peter 2:21. Of Christ's yielding up His spirit, John 19:30. Of the surrender of Christ and His followers to death, Romans 8:32; 2 Corinthians 4:11; Galatians 2:20. Of giving over to evil, Romans 1:26, Romans 1:28; 1 Corinthians 5:5; Ephesians 4:19. [source]
Rev., more correctly, therein is revealed a righteousness of God. The absence of the article denotes that a peculiar kind of righteousness is meant. This statement contains the subject of the epistle: Righteousness is by faith. The subject is not stated formally nor independently, but as a proof that the Gospel is a power, etc. This word δικαιοσύνη righteousnessand its kindred words δίκαιος righteousand δικαιόω tomake righteous, play so important a part in this epistle that it is desirable to fix their meaning as accurately as possible. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Classical Usage. In the Greek classics there appears an eternal, divine, unwritten principle of right, dwelling in the human consciousness, shaping both the physical and the moral ordering of the world, and personified as Themis ( Θέμις ). This word is used as a common noun in the phrase θέμις ἐστὶ itis right (fundamentally and eternally), like the Latin fas est. Thus Homer, of Penelope mourning for Ulysses, θέμις ἐστὶ γυναικός itis the sacred obligation of the wife (founded in her natural relation to her husband, ordained of heaven) to mourn (“Odyssey,” 14,130). So Antigone appeals to the unwritten law against the barbarity of refusing burial to her brother.“Nor did I deem thy edicts strong enough,That thou, a mortal man, shouldst overpass The unwritten laws of God that know not change.”Sophocles, “Antigone,” 453-455.See, also, “Odyssey,” 14,91; Aristophanes, “Clouds,” 140; “Antigone,” 880. This divine ordering requires that men should be shown or pointed to that which is according to it - a definite circle of duties and obligations which constitute right ( δίκη ). Thus what is δίκαιος righteousis properly the expression of the eternal Themis. While δίκη and θέμις are not to be distinguished as human and divine, δίκη has a more distinctively human, personal character, and comes into sharper definition. It introduces the distinction between absolute right and power. It imposes the recognition of a moral principle over against an absolutely constraining natural force. The conception of δίκη is strongly moral. Δίκαιος is right; δικαιοσύνη is rightness as characterizing the entire being of man. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- There is a religious background to the pagan conception. In the Homeric poems morality stands in a relation, loose and undeveloped indeed, but none the less real, to religion. This appears in the use of the oath in compacts; in the fear of the wrath of heaven for omission of sacrifices; in regarding refusal of hospitality as an offense against Zeus, the patron of strangers and suppliants. Certain tribes which are fierce and uncivilized are nevertheless described as δίκαιοι righteous“The characteristic stand-point of the Homeric ethics is that the spheres of law, of morals, and of religion are by no means separate, but lie side by side in undeveloped unity.” (Nagelsbach). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In later Greek literature this conception advances, in some instances, far toward the christian ideal; as in the fourth book of Plato's “Laws,” where he asserts that God holds in His hand the beginning, middle, and end of all things; that justice always follows Him, and punishes those who fall short of His laws. Those who would be dear to God must be like Him. Without holiness no man is accepted of God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Nevertheless, however clearly the religious background and sanction of morality may be recognized, it is apparent that the basis of right is found, very largely, in established social usage. The word ethics points first to what is established by custom. While with Mr. Grote we must admit the peculiar emphasis on the individual in the Homeric poems, we cannot help observing a certain influence of social sentiment on morals. While there are cases like the suitors, Paris and Helen, where public opinion imposes no moral check, there are others where the force of public opinion is clearly visible, such as Penelope and Nausicaa. The Homeric view of homicide reveals no relation between moral sentiment and divine enactment. Murder is a breach of social law, a private and civil wrong, entailing no loss of character. Its penalty is a satisfaction to the feelings of friends, or a compensation for lost services. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Later, we find this social aspect of morality even more strongly emphasized. “The city becomes the central and paramount source of obligation. The great, impersonal authority called 'the Laws' stands out separately, both as guide and sanction, distinct from religious duty or private sympathy” (Grote). Socrates is charged with impiety because he does not believe in the gods of the state, and Socrates himself agrees that that man does right who obeys what the citizens have agreed should be done, and who refrains from what they forbid. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The social basis of righteousness also appears in the frequent contrast between δίκη and βία , right and force. A violation of right is that which forces its way over the social sanction. The social conception of δίκαιος is not lost, even when the idea is so apprehended as to border on the christian love of one's neighbor. There is a wrong toward the gods, but every wrong is not in itself such. The inner, personal relation to deity, the absolute and constraining appeal of divine character and law to conscience, the view of duty as one's right, and of personal right as something to be surrendered to the paramount claim of love - all these elements which distinguish the christian conception of righteousness - are thus in sharp contrast with a righteousness dictated by social claims which limit the individual desire or preference, but which leave untouched the tenacity of personal right, and place obligation behind legitimacy. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- It is desirable that the classical usage of these terms should be understood, in order to throw into sharper relief the Biblical usage, according to which God is the absolute and final standard of right, and every wrong is a sin against God (Psalm 51:4). Each man stands in direct and primary relation to the holy God as He is by the law of His own nature. Righteousness is union with God in character. To the Greek mind of the legendary age such a conception is both strange and essentially impossible, since the Greek divinity is only the Greek man exaggerated in his virtues and vices alike. According to the christian ideal, righteousness is character, and the norm of character is likeness to God. This idea includes all the social aspects of right. Love and duty toward God involve love and duty to the neighbor. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Here must be noted a peculiar usage of δίκαιος righteousand δικαιοσύνη righteousnessin the Septuagint. They are at times interchanged with ἐλεημοσύνη mercyand ἔλεος kindnessThe Hebrew chesed kindness, though usually rendered by ἔλεος , is nine times translated by δικαιοσύνη righteousnessand once by δίκαιος righteousThe Hebrew tsedakah usually rendered by δικαιοσύνη , is nine times translated by ἐλεημοσύνη mercyand three times by ἔλεος kindnessCompare the Heb. and Sept. at Deuteronomy 6:25; Deuteronomy 24:13(15); Genesis 19:19; Genesis 24:27. This usage throws light on the reading δικαιοσύνην , Rev., righteousness (kindness? ), instead of ἐλεημοσύνην mercyA.V., alms, Matthew 6:1. Mr. Hatch (“Essays in Biblical Greek”) says that the meaning kindness is so clear in this passage that scribes, who were unaware of its existence, altered the text. He also thinks that this meaning gives a better sense than any other to Matthew 1:19“Joseph, being a kindly ( δίκαιος , A.V., just ) man.”-DIVIDER- 1. In the New Testament δίκαιος is used both of God and of Christ. Of God, 1 John 1:9; John 17:25; Revelation 16:5; Romans 3:26. Of Christ, 1 John 2:1; 1 John 3:7; Acts 3:14; Acts 7:52; Acts 22:14. In these passages the word characterizes God and Christ either in their essential quality or in their action; either as righteous according to the eternal norm of divine holiness (John 17:25; 1 John 3:7; Romans 3:26), or as holiness passes into righteous dealing with men (1 John 1:9). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 2. Δίκαιος is used of men, denoting their normal relation to the will and judgment of God. Hence it means virtuous, upright, pure in life, correct in thinking and feeling. It stands opposed to ἀνομία lawlessness ἁμαρτία sin ἀκαθαρσία impuritya contrast wanting in classical usage, where the conception of sin is vague. See Romans 6:13, Romans 6:16, Romans 6:18, Romans 6:20; Romans 8:10; 2 Corinthians 6:7, 2 Corinthians 6:14; Ephesians 5:9; Ephesians 6:14; Philemon 1:11; James 3:18. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Where δικαιοσύνη righteousnessis joined with ὁσιότης holiness(Luke 1:75; Ephesians 4:24), it denotes right conduct toward men, as holiness denotes piety toward God. It appears in the wider sense of answering to the demands of God in general, Matthew 13:17; Matthew 10:41; Matthew 23:29; Acts 10:22, Acts 10:35; and in the narrower sense of perfectly answering the divine demands, guiltless. So of Christ, Acts 3:14; 1 Peter 3:18; 1 John 2:1. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- 3. It is found in the classical sense of it is right, Philemon 1:7, or that which is right, Colossians 4:1. This, however, is included within the Christian conception. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Δικαιοσύνη righteousnessis therefore that which fulfills the claims of δίκη right“It is the state commanded by God and standing the test of His judgment; the character and acts of a man approved of Him, in virtue of which the man corresponds with Him and His will as His ideal and standard” (Cremer). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The medium of this righteousness is faith. Faith is said to be counted or reckoned for righteousness; i.e., righteousness is ascribed to it or recognized in it. Romans 4:3, Romans 4:6, Romans 4:9, Romans 4:22; Galatians 3:6; James 2:23. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In this verse the righteousness revealed in the Gospel is described as a righteousness of God. This does not mean righteousness as an attribute of God, as in Romans 3:5; but righteousness as bestowed on man by God. The state of the justified man is due to God. The righteousness which becomes his is that which God declares to be righteousness and ascribes to him. Righteousness thus expresses the relation of being right into which God puts the man who believes. See further, on justified, Romans 2:13.Is revealed ( ἀποκαλύπτεται )Emphasizing the peculiar sense in which “righteousness” is used here. Righteousness as an attribute of God was revealed before the Gospel. Righteousness in this sense is a matter of special revelation through the Gospel. The present tense describes the Gospel in its continuous proclamation: is being revealed.From faith to faith ( ἐκ πίστεως εἰς πίστιν )Rev., by faith unto faith. According to the A.V. the idea is that of progress in faith itself; either from Old to New Testament faith, or, in the individual, from a lower to a higher degree of faith; and this idea, I think, must be held here, although it is true that it is introduced secondarily, since Paul is dealing principally with the truth that righteousness is by faith. We may rightly say that the revealed righteousness of God is unto faith, in the sense of with a view to produce faith; but we may also say that faith is a progressive principle; that the aim of God's justifying righteousness is life, and that the just lives by his faith (Galatians 2:20), and enters into “more abundant” life with the development of his faith. Compare 2 Corinthians 2:16; 2 Corinthians 3:18; 2 Corinthians 4:17; Romans 6:19; and the phrase, justification of life, Romans 5:18.sa40 [source]
With even higher honor than an angel. Comp. Matthew 10:40; John 13:20. [source]
Λαός peopleonly here in Pastorals. In Paul ten times, always in citations. Most frequently in Luke and Acts; often in Hebrews and Revelation. Περιούσιος N.T.oA few times in lxx, always with λαός . See Exodus 19:5; Exodus 23:22; Deuteronomy 7:6; Deuteronomy 14:2; Deuteronomy 26:18. The phrase was originally applied to the people of Israel, but is transferred here to believers in the Messiah - Jews and Gentiles. Comp. 1 Peter 2:10. Περιούσιος is from the participle of περιεῖναι tobe over and above: hence περιουσία abundanceplenty. Περιούσιος also means possessed over and above, that is, specially selected for one's own; exempt from ordinary laws of distribution. Hence correctly represented by peculiar, derived from peculium, a private purse, a special acquisition of a member of a family distinct from the property administered for the good of the whole family. Accordingly the sense is given in Ephesians 1:14, where believers are said to have been sealed εἰς ἀπολύτρωσιν τῆς περιποιήσεως witha view to redemption of possession, or redemption which will give possession, thus = acquisition. So 1 Peter 2:9, where Christians are styled λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν apeople for acquisition, to be acquired by God as his peculiar possession. Comp. 1 Thessalonians 5:9; 2 Thessalonians 2:14, and περιποιεῖσθαι toacquire, Acts 20:28. The phrase καθαρίζειν λαὸν topurify the people, in lxx, Nehemiah 12:30; Acts href="/desk/?q=ac+21:20&sr=1">Acts 21:20; Acts 22:3; 1 Peter 3:13. Only here in Pastorals. In Paul, 1 Corinthians 14:12; Galatians 1:14. For the word as a title, see on the Canaanite, Matthew 10:4, and see on Mark 3:18. [source]
Present active articular participle of a late verb, so far found only here and in ecclesiastical writers (the example cited by Blass being an error, Deissmann, Light etc., p. 76), from πιλοπρωτος philoprōtos fond of being first (Plutarch), and made like πιλοπονεω philoponeō (papyri), to be fond of toil. This ambition of Diotrephes does not prove that he was a bishop over elders, as was true in the second century (as Ignatius shows). He may have been an elder (bishop) or deacon, but clearly desired to rule the whole church. Some forty years ago I wrote an article on Diotrephes for a denominational paper. The editor told me that twenty-five deacons stopped the paper to show their resentment against being personally attacked in the paper.Receiveth us not (ουκ επιδεχεται ημας ouk epidechetai hēmās). Present active indicative of this old compound, in N.T. only here and 3 John 1:10. Diotrephes refused to accept John‘s authority or those who sided with him, John‘s missionaries or delegates (cf. Matthew 10:40). [source]
Present active indicative of this old compound, in N.T. only here and 3 John 1:10. Diotrephes refused to accept John‘s authority or those who sided with him, John‘s missionaries or delegates (cf. Matthew 10:40). [source]
Old word from πσυχω psuchō to grow cold (Matthew 24:12), in N.T. only Matthew 10:42 and this passage. [source]