KJV: And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;
YLT: And if certain of the branches were broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wast graffed in among them, and a fellow-partaker of the root and of the fatness of the olive tree didst become --
Darby: Now if some of the branches have been broken out, and thou, being a wild olive tree, hast been grafted in amongst them, and hast become a fellow-partaker of the root and of the fatness of the olive tree,
ASV: But if some of the branches were broken off, and thou, being a wild olive, wast grafted in among them, and didst become partaker with them of the root of the fatness of the olive tree;
| δέ | however |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: δέ Sense: but, moreover, and, etc. |
|
| τινες | some |
|
Parse: Interrogative / Indefinite Pronoun, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: τὶς Sense: a certain, a certain one. |
|
| τῶν | of the |
|
Parse: Article, Genitive Masculine Plural Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| κλάδων | branches |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Masculine Plural Root: κλάδος Sense: a young tender shoot, broken off for grafting. |
|
| ἐξεκλάσθησαν | were broken off |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Passive, 3rd Person Plural Root: ἐκκλάω Sense: to break off, to cut off. |
|
| δὲ | now |
|
Parse: Conjunction Root: δέ Sense: but, moreover, and, etc. |
|
| ἀγριέλαιος | a wild olive tree |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Feminine Singular Root: ἀγριέλαιος Sense: of or belonging to the oleaster or wild olive. |
|
| ὢν | being |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Active, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: εἰμί Sense: to be, to exist, to happen, to be present. |
|
| ἐνεκεντρίσθης | were grafted in |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Passive, 2nd Person Singular Root: ἐγκεντρίζω Sense: to cut into for the sake of inserting a scion. |
|
| συνκοινωνὸς | a fellow-partaker |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: συγκοινωνός Sense: participant with others in anything, joint partner. |
|
| τῆς | of the |
|
Parse: Article, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| ῥίζης | root |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: ῥίζα Sense: a root. |
|
| πιότητος | fatness |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: πιότης Sense: fatness. |
|
| ἐλαίας | olive tree |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: ἐλαία Sense: an olive tree. |
|
| ἐγένου | have become |
|
Parse: Verb, Aorist Indicative Middle, 2nd Person Singular Root: γίνομαι Sense: to become, i. |
|
Greek Commentary for Romans 11:17
From κλαω klaō to break. [source]
First aorist passive indicative of εκκλαω ekklaō Play on the word κλαδος klados (branch) and εκκλαω ekklaō to break off. Condition of first class, assumed as true. Some of the individual Jews (natural Israel) were broken off the stock of the tree (spiritual Israel). And thou (και συ kai su). An individual Gentile. Being a wild olive This word, used by Aristotle, occurs in an inscription. Ramsay (Pauline Studies, pp. 219ff.) shows that the ancients used the wild-olive graft upon an old olive tree to reinvigorate the tree precisely as Paul uses the figure here and that both the olive tree and the graft were influenced by each other, though the wild olive graft did not produce as good olives as the original stock. But it should be noted that in Romans 11:24 Paul expressly states that the grafting of Gentiles on to the stock of the spiritual Israel was “contrary to nature” Wast grafted in (ενεκεντριστης enekentristhēs). First aorist passive indicative of ενκεντριζω enkentrizō to cut in, to graft, used by Aristotle. Belongs “to the higher Koiné{[28928]}š ” (literary Koiné{[28928]}š) according to Milligan. Partaker Corinthians-partner. Fatness (πιοτητος piotētos). Old word from πιων piōn (fat), only here in N.T. Note three genitives here “of the root of the fatness of the olive.” [source]
An individual Gentile. [source]
This word, used by Aristotle, occurs in an inscription. Ramsay (Pauline Studies, pp. 219ff.) shows that the ancients used the wild-olive graft upon an old olive tree to reinvigorate the tree precisely as Paul uses the figure here and that both the olive tree and the graft were influenced by each other, though the wild olive graft did not produce as good olives as the original stock. But it should be noted that in Romans 11:24 Paul expressly states that the grafting of Gentiles on to the stock of the spiritual Israel was “contrary to nature” Wast grafted in (ενεκεντριστης enekentristhēs). First aorist passive indicative of ενκεντριζω enkentrizō to cut in, to graft, used by Aristotle. Belongs “to the higher Koiné{[28928]}š ” (literary Koiné{[28928]}š) according to Milligan. Partaker Corinthians-partner. Fatness (πιοτητος piotētos). Old word from πιων piōn (fat), only here in N.T. Note three genitives here “of the root of the fatness of the olive.” [source]
First aorist passive indicative of ενκεντριζω enkentrizō to cut in, to graft, used by Aristotle. Belongs “to the higher Koiné{[28928]}š ” (literary Koiné{[28928]}š) according to Milligan. [source]
Corinthians-partner. Fatness (πιοτητος piotētos). Old word from πιων piōn (fat), only here in N.T. Note three genitives here “of the root of the fatness of the olive.” [source]
Old word from πιων piōn (fat), only here in N.T. Note three genitives here “of the root of the fatness of the olive.” [source]
See on Matthew 24:32; see on Mark 11:8. The derivation of κλάδων branchesfrom κλάω tobreak, is exhibited in the word-play between the noun and the verb: kladon exeklasthesan A wild olive-tree ( ἀγριέλαιος )To be taken as an adjective, belonging to the wild olive. Hence Rev., correctly, rejects tree, since the Gentiles are addressed not as a whole but as individuals. Meyer says: “The ingrafting of the Gentiles took place at first only partially and in single instances; while the thou addressed cannot represent heathendom as a whole, and is also not appropriate to the figure itself; because, in fact, not whole trees, not even quite young ones are ingrafted, either with the stem or as to all their branches. Besides, Romans 11:24contradicts this view.” [source]
To be taken as an adjective, belonging to the wild olive. Hence Rev., correctly, rejects tree, since the Gentiles are addressed not as a whole but as individuals. Meyer says: “The ingrafting of the Gentiles took place at first only partially and in single instances; while the thou addressed cannot represent heathendom as a whole, and is also not appropriate to the figure itself; because, in fact, not whole trees, not even quite young ones are ingrafted, either with the stem or as to all their branches. Besides, Romans 11:24contradicts this view.” [source]
The best texts omit καὶ andand render of the root of the fatness: the root as the source of the fatness. Paul's figure is: The Jewish nation is a tree from which some branches have been cut, but which remains living because the root (and therefore all the branches connected with it) is still alive. Into this living tree the wild branch, the Gentile, is grafted among the living branches, and thus draws life from the root. The insertion of the wild branches takes place in connection with the cutting off of the natural branches (the bringing in of the Gentiles in connection with the rejection of the Jews). But the grafted branches should not glory over the natural branches because of the cutting off of some of the latter, since they derive their life from the common root. “The life-force and the blessing are received by the Gentile through the Jew, and not by the Jew through the Gentile. The spiritual plan moves from the Abrahamic covenant downward, and from the Israelitish nation outward” (Dwight). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The figure is challenged on the ground that the process of grafting is the insertion of the good into the inferior stock, while here the case is reversed. It has been suggested in explanation that Paul took the figure merely at the point of inserting one piece into another; that he was ignorant of the agricultural process; that he was emphasizing the process of grace as contrary to that of nature. References to a custom of grafting wild upon good trees are not sufficiently decisive to warrant the belief that the practice was common. Dr. Thomson says: “In the kingdom of nature generally, certainly in the case of the olive, the process referred to by the apostle never succeeds. Graft the good upon the wild, and, as the Arabs say, 'it will conquer the wild;' but you cannot reverse the process with success … . It is only in the kingdom of grace that a process thus contrary to nature can be successful; and it is this circumstance which the apostle has seized upon to magnify the mercy shown to the Gentiles by grafting them, a wild race, contrary to the nature of such operations, into the good olive tree of the church, and causing them to flourish there and bring forth fruit unto eternal life. The apostle lived in the land of the olive, and was in no danger of falling into a blunder in founding his argument upon such a circumstance in its cultivation” (“Land and Book, Lebanon, Damascus and Beyond Jordan,” p. 35). Meyer says: “The subject-matter did not require the figure of the ordinary grafting, but the converse - the grafting of the wild scion and its ennoblement thereby. The Gentile scion was to receive, not to impart, fertility.”-DIVIDER- [source]
The verb occurs only in this chapter. From κέντπον asting, a goad. See on Revelation 9:9. Thus, in the verb to graft the incision is emphasized. Some render in their place, instead of among them; but the latter agrees better with partakest. Hence the reference is not to some of the broken off branches in whose place the Gentiles were grafted, but to the branches in general. [source]
Lit., as Rev., didst become partaker with them. See on Revelation 1:9; and see on partners, Luke 5:10. With them, the natural branches. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Romans 11:17
The A.V. entirely ignores the distinction between αὐλή , fold, and ποίμνη , flock. The latter word is found Matthew 26:31; Luke 2:8; 1 Corinthians 9:7, and always distinctly meaning a flock, as does also the diminutive ποίμνιον , little flock (Luke 12:32; 1 Peter 5:2, etc.). Render, as Rev., one flock, one shepherd. So Tyndale's Version of the New Testament. Compare Ezekiel 34:23. We are not, however, to say with Trench (“A.V. of the New Testament”), that the Jew and the Gentile are the two folds which Christ will gather into a single flock. The heathen are not conceived as a fold, but as a dispersion. See John 7:35; John 11:52; and, as Meyer observes, “the thought of a divine leading of the heathen does not correspond at all to the figure of fold, of which the conception of theocratic fellowship constitutes an essential feature.” So Bengel. “He says, other sheep, not another fold, for they were scattered abroad in the world.” When Jesus speaks of the other sheep who are not from this fold, the emphasis is on fold, not on this. Compare Romans 11:17sqq. Nor, moreover, does Jesus mean that the Gentiles are to be incorporated into the Jewish fold, but that the unity of the two is to consist in their common relation to Himself. “The unity of the Church does not spring out of the extension of the old kingdom, but is the spiritual antitype of that earthly figure. Nothing is said of one fold under the new dispensation” (Westcott). It will readily be seen that the incorrect rendering fostered by the carelessness or the mistake of some of the Western fathers, and by the Vulgate, which renders both words by ovile, fold, has been in the interest of Romish claims. [source]
One of the phrases in Acts 20:15 for the coming day. Locative case of time. Purifying himself with them (συν αυτοις αγνιστεις sun autois hagnistheis first aorist passive participle of αγνιζω hagnizō). The precise language again of the recommendation in Acts 21:24. Paul was conforming to the letter. Went into the temple Imperfect active of εισειμι eiseimi as in Acts 21:18 which see. Went on into the temple, descriptive imperfect. Paul joined the four men in their vow of separation. Declaring (διαγγελλων diaggellōn). To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except Romans 11:17 (quotation from the lxx). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). Until the offering was offered for every one of them This use of εως ου heōs hou (like εως heōs alone) with the first aorist passive indicative προσηνεχτη prosēnechthē of προσπερω prospherō to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul‘s announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in 1 Corinthians 9:20 when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these “false apostles” over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul‘s accusers. So far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul‘s behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul‘s appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul‘s alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul‘s conduct about it. [source]
To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except Romans 11:17 (quotation from the lxx). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). [source]
Imperfect active of εισειμι eiseimi as in Acts 21:18 which see. Went on into the temple, descriptive imperfect. Paul joined the four men in their vow of separation. Declaring (διαγγελλων diaggellōn). To the priests what day he would report the fulfilment of the vow. The priests would desire notice of the sacrifice. This verb only used by Luke in N.T. except Romans 11:17 (quotation from the lxx). It is not necessary to assume that the vows of each of the five expired on the same day (Rackham). Until the offering was offered for every one of them This use of εως ου heōs hou (like εως heōs alone) with the first aorist passive indicative προσηνεχτη prosēnechthē of προσπερω prospherō to offer, contemplates the final result (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 974f.) and is probably the statement of Luke added to Paul‘s announcement. He probably went into the temple one day for each of the brethren and one for himself. The question arises whether Paul acted wisely or unwisely in agreeing to the suggestion of James. What he did was in perfect harmony with his principle of accommodation in 1 Corinthians 9:20 when no principle was involved. It is charged that here on this occasion Paul was unduly influenced by considerations of expediency and was willing for the Jewish Christians to believe him more of a Jew than was true in order to placate the situation in Jerusalem. Furneaux calls it a compromise and a failure. I do not so see it. To say that is to obscure the whole complex situation. What Paul did was not for the purpose of conciliating his opponents, the Judaizers, who had diligently spread falsehoods about him in Jerusalem as in Corinth. It was solely to break the power of these “false apostles” over the thousands in Jerusalem who have been deluded by Paul‘s accusers. So far as the evidence goes that thing was accomplished. In the trouble that comes in Jerusalem and Caesarea the Judaizers cut no figure at all. The Jewish Christians do not appear in Paul‘s behalf, but there was no opportunity for them to do so. The explosion that came on the last day of Paul‘s appearance in the temple was wholly disconnected from his offerings for the four brethren and himself. It must be remembered that Paul had many kinds of enemies. The attack on him by these Jews from Asia had no connexion whatever with the slanders of the Judaizers about Paul‘s alleged teachings that Jewish Christians in the dispersion should depart from the Mosaic law. That slander was put to rest forever by his following the advice of James and justifies the wisdom of that advice and Paul‘s conduct about it. [source]
See on Romans 11:25. Rev., in some measure, qualifying I write, and referring to some passage in which he had spoken with especial plainness; as Romans 6:12, Romans 6:19; Romans 8:9; Romans 11:17; Romans 14:3, Romans 14:4, Romans 14:10, Romans 14:13, Romans 14:15, Romans 14:20, etc. [source]
See remarks on Romans 11:17. [source]
Third class condition, εαν ean and present active subjunctive. Otherwise (επει epei). Ellipse after επει epei “since if thou dost not continue.” Thou also Precisely as the Jewish branches of Romans 11:17 were. Shalt be cut off (εκκοπησηι ekkopēsēi). Second future passive of εκκοπτω ekkoptō to cut out. [source]
Precisely as the Jewish branches of Romans 11:17 were. Shalt be cut off (εκκοπησηι ekkopēsēi). Second future passive of εκκοπτω ekkoptō to cut out. [source]
Old comparative adverb from τολμηρως tolmērōs Most MSS. read τολμηροτερον tolmēroteron Only here in N.T. In some measure (απο μερους apo merous). Perhaps referring to some portions of the Epistle where he has spoken plainly (Romans 6:12, Romans 6:19; Romans 8:9; Romans 11:17; Romans 14:3, Romans 14:4, Romans 14:10, etc.). As putting you again in remembrance Delicately put with ως hōs and επι epi in the verb, “as if calling back to mind again” This rare verb is here alone in the N.T. [source]
Perhaps referring to some portions of the Epistle where he has spoken plainly (Romans 6:12, Romans 6:19; Romans 8:9; Romans 11:17; Romans 14:3, Romans 14:4, Romans 14:10, etc.). [source]
Better, a root. It is not the only root. In Paul only metaphorically. See Romans 11:16, Romans 11:17, Romans 11:18. [source]
Only here in New Testament. Better, and more literally, as Rev., implanted. It marks a characteristic of the word of truth (James 1:18). It is implanted; divinely given, in contrast with something acquired by study. Compare Matthew 13:19, “the word of the kingdom - sown in his heart.” Grafted or graffed is expressed by a peculiar word, employed by Paul only, ἐγκεντρίζω , from κέντρον , a sharp point, thus emphasizing the fact of the incision required in grafting. See Romans 11:17, Romans 11:19, Romans 11:23, Romans 11:24. [source]
The article seems to point to what is known. For this original use of ελαια elaia see Romans 11:17, Romans 11:24. In Zechariah 4:2, Zechariah 4:3, Zechariah 4:14 the lampstand or candlestick (λυχνια luchnia) is Israel, and the two olive trees apparently Joshua and Zerubbabel, but John makes his own use of this symbolism. Here the two olive trees and the candlesticks are identical. [source]
Sort of motto for each church (Revelation 2:25).That no one take (ινα μηδεις λαβηι hina mēdeis labēi). Purpose clause with ινα hina and second aorist active subjunctive of λαμβανω lambanō Here to take away “thy crown” (Revelation 2:10) which will be thine if really won and not forfeited by failure (2 Timothy 4:8). In that case it will go to another (Matthew 25:28; Romans 11:17.). [source]
See note on 1 Corinthians 9:23. “Co-partner with you” (Romans 11:17). One article with αδελπος adelphos and συνκοινωνος sunkoinōnos unifying the picture. The absence of αποστολος apostolos here does not show that he is not an apostle, but merely his self-effacement, as in the Fourth Gospel, and still more his oneness with his readers. So there is only one article All this is possible only “in Jesus” Rather, “I came to be,” second aorist middle indicative of γινομαι ginomai the isle that is called Patmos (εν τηι νησωι τηι καλουμενηι Πατμωι en tēi nēsōi tēi kaloumenēi Patmōi). Patmos is a rocky sparsely settled island some ten miles long and half that wide, one of the Sporades group in the Aegean Sea, south of Miletus. The present condition of the island is well described by W. E. Geil in The Isle That Is Called Patmos (1905). Here John saw the visions described in the book, apparently written while still a prisoner there in exile.For the word of God and the testimony of Jesus The reason for (δια dia and the accusative) John‘s presence in Patmos, naturally as a result of persecution already alluded to, not for the purpose of preaching there or of receiving the visions. See Revelation 1:2 for the phrase. [source]
Purpose clause with ινα hina and second aorist active subjunctive of λαμβανω lambanō Here to take away “thy crown” (Revelation 2:10) which will be thine if really won and not forfeited by failure (2 Timothy 4:8). In that case it will go to another (Matthew 25:28; Romans 11:17.). [source]